From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Martin Wilck" <martin.wilck@suse.com>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, yukuai@fygo.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH] md/raid1: create serial pool adding rdev to array with serialize_policy=1
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 11:47:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260723114728.CFEE81F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260723112741.1206836-1-mwilck@suse.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] This problem wasn't introduced by this patch, but `mddev_create_serial_pool` silently ignores memory allocation failures, leading to a guaranteed kernel panic on subsequent I/O.
- [High] This problem wasn't introduced by this patch, but echoing `-writemostly` to a device's sysfs state unconditionally destroys its serialization structures, even if the array-wide `MD_SERIALIZE_POLICY` is active, causing a NULL pointer dereference on the next I/O.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH] md/raid1: create serial pool adding rdev to array with serialize_policy=1 ---
commit ac16670aca465de3c72a1f91b7b1bbb4e463a255
Author: Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@suse.com>
md/raid1: create serial pool adding rdev to array with serialize_policy=1
The raid1.c code calls wait_for_serialization() if the MD_SERIALIZE_POLICY
is set, and wait_for_serialization assumes that rdev->serial is
initialized. Normally this will be the case for arrays that have
the serialize_policy sysfs attribute set to 1.
But when a new rdev is added to an existing array in bind_rdev_to_array(),
the condition at mddev_create_serial_pool() causes creation of rdev->serial
to be skipped. Fix it.
Fixes: 69b00b5bb235 ("md: introduce a new struct for IO serialization")
Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
> index d1465bcd86c81..baf79c501c9ec 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/md.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
> @@ -234,7 +234,8 @@ void mddev_create_serial_pool(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
> {
> int ret = 0;
>
> - if (rdev && !rdev_need_serial(rdev) &&
> + if (!test_bit(MD_SERIALIZE_POLICY, &mddev->flags) &&
> + rdev && !rdev_need_serial(rdev) &&
> !test_bit(CollisionCheck, &rdev->flags))
> return;
>
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but I noticed that
mddev_create_serial_pool() silently ignores memory allocation failures.
If rdev_init_serial() or mempool_create_kmalloc_pool() fails due to memory
pressure, mddev_create_serial_pool() catches the error but returns early
without propagating it:
drivers/md/md.c:mddev_create_serial_pool() {
...
if (ret)
return;
if (mddev->serial_info_pool == NULL) {
...
}
Callers like bind_rdev_to_array() proceed as if successful, setting the
MD_SERIALIZE_POLICY bit. On the next I/O, raid1_make_request() invokes
serialization functions like check_and_add_serial() that unconditionally
dereference the unallocated rdev->serial pointers:
drivers/md/raid1.c:check_and_add_serial() {
...
struct serial_in_rdev *serial = &rdev->serial[idx];
spin_lock_irqsave(&serial->serial_lock, flags);
...
}
Should mddev_create_serial_pool() return an error code instead of void to
prevent this crash?
[Severity: High]
This is another pre-existing issue, but while reviewing the serialization
logic I noticed that echoing "-writemostly" to a device's state via sysfs
unconditionally destroys its serialization structures.
In state_store(), this destroys the serial pool for the specific rdev without
checking the array-wide policy:
drivers/md/md.c:state_store() {
...
} else if (cmd_match(buf, "-writemostly")) {
mddev_destroy_serial_pool(rdev->mddev, rdev);
clear_bit(WriteMostly, &rdev->flags);
...
}
This unconditionally frees rdev->serial for the device:
drivers/md/md.c:mddev_destroy_serial_pool() {
...
if (rdev)
rdev_uninit_serial(rdev);
...
}
If the array-wide MD_SERIALIZE_POLICY is still active, the next I/O will
invoke wait_for_serialization() and remove_serial(), which dereference the
now-freed rdev->serial pointer:
drivers/md/raid1.c:check_and_add_serial() {
...
struct serial_in_rdev *serial = &rdev->serial[idx];
spin_lock_irqsave(&serial->serial_lock, flags);
...
}
Should state_store() check if MD_SERIALIZE_POLICY is still active before
destroying the serial pool?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260723112741.1206836-1-mwilck@suse.com?part=1
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-23 11:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-23 11:27 [PATCH] md/raid1: create serial pool adding rdev to array with serialize_policy=1 Martin Wilck
2026-07-23 11:47 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
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=20260723114728.CFEE81F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.wilck@suse.com \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=yukuai@fygo.io \
/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