Linux s390 Architecture development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Alexander Egorenkov" <egorenar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: "Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/sclp: Ensure no callback gets called after sclp_unregister() returns
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2026 08:01:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260804080108.4DDF51F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260804074511.236153-3-egorenar@linux.ibm.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Missing synchronization in sclp_register() error path leads to Use-After-Free.
- [Medium] Concurrent execution of state_change_fn and receiver_fn corrupts the completion mechanism.
--

--- Patch [2]: [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/sclp: Ensure no callback gets called after sclp_unregister() returns ---
commit 56ff5dbe692c5051e8907f572849ceb9402fdda1
Author: Alexander Egorenkov <egorenar@linux.ibm.com>

s390/sclp: Ensure no callback gets called after sclp_unregister() returns

This commit adds a completion mechanism to prevent callbacks from being 
executed after a driver unregisters from the SCLP subsystem. It blocks 
sclp_unregister() until any inflight state change or receive callbacks 
have finished executing.

> It is sufficient to use only one completion per struct sclp_register
> because the callbacks state_change_fn() and receiver_fn() never get called
> in parallel.

[Severity: Medium]
Is this assumption accurate?

Looking at sclp_dispatch_state_change() and sclp_dispatch_evbufs(), both 
functions drop sclp_lock before invoking their respective callbacks. If a 
driver registers both callbacks (such as sclp_input_event in sclp_tty.c), 
could both dispatchers execute concurrently?

If they run in parallel, it seems they would both call reinit_completion() 
and complete() on the same reg->done completion, potentially corrupting it 
and causing a premature wakeup in sclp_unregister().

> diff --git a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c
> index 98e334724a627..8954f4260401b 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/char/sclp.c

[ ... ]

> @@ -885,6 +890,8 @@ sclp_register(struct sclp_register *reg)
>  	/* Trigger initial state change callback */
>  	reg->sclp_receive_mask = 0;
>  	reg->sclp_send_mask = 0;
> +	init_completion(&reg->done);
> +	complete(&reg->done);
>  	list_add(&reg->list, &sclp_reg_list);
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sclp_lock, flags);
>  	rc = sclp_init_mask(1);

[Severity: High]
If sclp_init_mask(1) fails here and returns an error, the listener is removed
from sclp_reg_list and sclp_register() returns the error to the caller.

Since the listener was briefly in the active list, could a hardware interrupt
have started executing the callback concurrently? 

If so, does this error path also need to call wait_for_completion(&reg->done)
before returning? Otherwise, it looks like a concurrently executing callback
could call complete(&reg->done) on a freed structure if the caller frees the
listener after the registration failure.

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260804074511.236153-1-egorenar@linux.ibm.com?part=2

      reply	other threads:[~2026-08-04  8:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-04  7:45 [PATCH v2 0/2] s390/sclp: Misc fixes Alexander Egorenkov
2026-08-04  7:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] s390/sclp_ocf: Fix computation of length of GDS values Alexander Egorenkov
2026-08-04  7:55   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-04  7:45 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/sclp: Ensure no callback gets called after sclp_unregister() returns Alexander Egorenkov
2026-08-04  8:01   ` 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=20260804080108.4DDF51F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=egorenar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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