From: Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi <abd.masalkhi@gmail.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, yukuai@fygo.io
Subject: Re: [PATCH] md: make mddev_get() fail until md_alloc() has finished
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2026 14:15:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2tslm1988.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <sashiko-outbox-211074@kernel.org>
Hi Kuai,
On Thu, Nov 12, 2026 at 12:13 +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential
> issues to consider:
> - [Medium] md: premature KOBJ_ADD uevent in add_disk() while mddev_get()
> fails
> - [Low] md: stale reconfig_mutex lock and comment in md_alloc()
> It also noticed 1 related pre-existing issue this patch does not
> introduce:
> - [Medium] md: kernfs_node memory leak in mddev_unlock() [1]
> --
>
> commit 2ddaaecbff58458e8c38353164498300daf7d131
> Author: Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi <abd.masalkhi@gmail.com>
>
> md: make mddev_get() fail until md_alloc() has finished
>
> This commit adds an mddev->sysfs_live flag set under all_mddevs_lock after
> kobject_add() succeeds in md_alloc(), and updates mddev_get() to fail until
> that flag is set.
>
> Link: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261029202209.1422567-1-abd.masalkhi@gmail.com?part=4
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
>> index 03e35386a8028..47118e9d1a656 100644
>> --- a/drivers/md/md.c
>> +++ b/drivers/md/md.c
>> @@ -641,7 +641,7 @@ static inline struct mddev *mddev_get(struct mddev *mddev)
>> {
>> lockdep_assert_held(&all_mddevs_lock);
>>
>> - if (test_bit(MD_DELETED, &mddev->flags))
>> + if (test_bit(MD_DELETED, &mddev->flags) || !mddev->sysfs_live)
>> return NULL;
>> atomic_inc(&mddev->active);
>> return mddev;
>> @@ -6432,10 +6432,16 @@ struct mddev *md_alloc(dev_t dev, char *name)
>> return ERR_PTR(error);
>> }
>>
>> - kobject_uevent(&mddev->kobj, KOBJ_ADD);
>> mddev->sysfs_state = sysfs_get_dirent_safe(mddev->kobj.sd, "array_state");
>> mddev->sysfs_level = sysfs_get_dirent_safe(mddev->kobj.sd, "level");
>
> [Severity: Medium]
> This problem wasn't introduced by this patch, but when
> legacy_async_del_gendisk is disabled, does mddev_unlock() leak
> mddev->sysfs_state and mddev->sysfs_level [1]?
>
> md_kobj_release() only calls sysfs_put() on mddev->sysfs_state and
> mddev->sysfs_level when legacy_async_del_gendisk is true, and the
> !legacy_async_del_gendisk teardown path in mddev_unlock() deletes
> mddev->kobj and mddev->gendisk without releasing those kernfs_node
> references:
>
> drivers/md/md.c:md_kobj_release() {
> if (legacy_async_del_gendisk) {
> if (mddev->sysfs_state)
> sysfs_put(mddev->sysfs_state);
> if (mddev->sysfs_level)
> sysfs_put(mddev->sysfs_level);
> del_gendisk(mddev->gendisk);
> }
> put_disk(mddev->gendisk);
> }
>
>> +
>> + spin_lock(&all_mddevs_lock);
>> + mddev->sysfs_live = true;
>> + spin_unlock(&all_mddevs_lock);
>> +
>> + kobject_uevent(&mddev->kobj, KOBJ_ADD);
>> mutex_unlock(&disks_mutex);
>> +
>> return mddev;
>>
>> out_put_disk:
>
> [Severity: Medium]
> Does making mddev_get() fail until mddev->sysfs_live is set cause a
> regression where udevd or concurrent openers fail with -ENODEV in md_open()
> and -EBUSY on md/ sysfs attributes right after add_disk() announces the
> disk?
>
> kobject_uevent(&mddev->kobj, KOBJ_ADD) is dropped by dev_uevent_filter()
> because mddev->kobj has ktype &md_ktype rather than &device_ktype. The
> KOBJ_ADD uevent that actually reaches user space is sent earlier inside
> add_disk() -> add_disk_final() -> disk_uevent(disk, KOBJ_ADD), right after
> bdev_add() publishes the block device inode while mddev->sysfs_live is
> still false:
>
> CPU0 CPU1 (udevd / opener)
> md_alloc()
> add_disk(disk)
> add_disk_final(disk)
> bdev_add(...)
> disk_uevent(disk, KOBJ_ADD)
> blkdev_get_no_open()
> md_open()
> mddev_find()
> mddev_get() -> NULL <-- -ENODEV
> kobject_add(&mddev->kobj, ...)
> mddev->sysfs_live = true
>
I missed this case. Do you have a suggestion for a better fix, or should
I just drop this patch?
> [Severity: Low]
> Since mddev_get() now returns NULL until mddev->sysfs_live is set after
> mddev_unlock(mddev), md_open() can no longer succeed while reconfig_mutex
> is held across add_disk() and kobject_add() from commit d1472ca2ca5d ("md:
> don't hand out the array before md_alloc() has added mddev->kobj").
>
> drivers/md/md.c:md_alloc() {
> /*
> * add_disk() makes the array openable before mddev->kobj exists.
> * Hold reconfig_mutex until kobject_add() is done so that ioctls
> * issued in between wait instead of using an uninitialised kobj.
> */
> mddev_lock_nointr(mddev);
> error = add_disk(disk);
> ...
> error = kobject_add(&mddev->kobj, &disk_to_dev(disk)->kobj, "%s", "md");
> mddev_unlock(mddev);
> }
>
> Does this make the comment and reconfig_mutex critical section in
> md_alloc() obsolete, as well as the commit message's first paragraph
> claiming that ioctls such as ADD_NEW_DISK can run before kobject_add()
> completes?
>
> [1] https://sashiko.dev/#/bug/linux-460ea5ed-96ea-49a0-8383-cfa84f28520b
>
> --
> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261112114958.2244-1-abd.masalkhi@gmail.com?part=1
--
Best Regards,
Abd-Alrhman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-12 13:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-12 11:49 [PATCH] md: make mddev_get() fail until md_alloc() has finished Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi
2026-11-12 12:13 ` sashiko-bot
2026-11-12 13:15 ` Abd-Alrhman Masalkhi [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=m2tslm1988.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=abd.masalkhi@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--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