From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>, Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Chris Mason <clm@fb.com>,
Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com>, David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] fix potential access after free: return value of blk_check_plugged() must be used schedule() safe
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2016 13:10:57 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87k2kbo2im.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160406004956.GA102852@kernel.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1592 bytes --]
On Wed, Apr 06 2016, Shaohua Li wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 03:36:57PM +0200, Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>> blk_check_plugged() will return a pointer
>> to an object linked on current->plug->cb_list.
>>
>> That list may "at any time" be implicitly cleared by
>> blk_flush_plug_list()
>> flush_plug_callbacks()
>> either as a result of blk_finish_plug(),
>> or implicitly by schedule() [and maybe other implicit mechanisms?]
>>
>> If there is no protection against an implicit unplug
>> between the call to blk_check_plug() and using its return value,
>> that implicit unplug may have already happened,
>> even before the plug is actually initialized or populated,
>> and we may be using a pointer to already free()d data.
>
> This isn't correct. flush plug is never called in preemption, which is designed
> only called when the task is going to sleep. See sched_submit_work. Am I
> missing anything?
Ahh yes, thanks.
Only two places call blk_schedule_flush_plug().
One is io_schedule_timeout() which must be called explicitly.
There other is, as you say, sched_submit_work(). It starts:
static inline void sched_submit_work(struct task_struct *tsk)
{
if (!tsk->state || tsk_is_pi_blocked(tsk))
return;
so if the task is runnable, then as
include/linux/sched.h:#define TASK_RUNNING 0
it will never call blk_schedule_flush_plug().
So I don't think you are missing anything, we were.
Lars: have your concerns been relieved or do you still have reason to
think there is a problem?
Thanks,
NeilBrown
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 818 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-06 3:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-05 13:36 [PATCH] [RFC] fix potential access after free: return value of blk_check_plugged() must be used schedule() safe Lars Ellenberg
2016-04-05 22:49 ` NeilBrown
2016-04-06 0:30 ` Chris Mason
2016-04-06 0:49 ` Shaohua Li
2016-04-06 3:10 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2016-04-06 12:01 ` Lars Ellenberg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87k2kbo2im.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=clm@fb.com \
--cc=dsterba@suse.com \
--cc=jbacik@fb.com \
--cc=lars.ellenberg@linbit.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shli@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).