From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Stefan Haberland" <sth@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, "Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
"Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/19] s390/dasd: Snapshot intrc before freeing the request block
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2026 13:06:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260805130640.E10B21F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260805111612.1285190-5-sth@linux.ibm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] Missing `blk_rq_has_data()` / `bio_has_data()` guard in `dasd_fba_free_cp` causes NULL pointer dereference for dataless requests.
- [High] Accessing `req->q` after calling `blk_mq_end_request()` results in a use-after-free.
- [High] Dereferencing `cqr->dq` to release a lock after `cqr` has been freed leads to a use-after-free in `dasd_flush_block_queue()`.
- [High] Block layer request use-after-free in `dasd_generic_requeue_all_requests` error path.
--
--- Patch [4]: [PATCH 04/19] s390/dasd: Snapshot intrc before freeing the request block ---
commit 8cd8a0d1124e90e3f5df17a63495a14c3de26d80
Author: Stefan Haberland <sth@linux.ibm.com>
s390/dasd: Snapshot intrc before freeing the request block
This patch fixes a race condition where the request block's intrc field is
read after the block is returned to the memory pool. By snapshotting intrc
before calling free_cp(), it prevents concurrent reallocations from
overwriting the completion status.
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/dasd.c b/drivers/s390/block/dasd.c
> --- a/drivers/s390/block/dasd.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/block/dasd.c
> @@ -2699,17 +2699,23 @@ static void __dasd_cleanup_cqr(struct dasd_ccw_req *cqr)
> struct request *req;
> blk_status_t error = BLK_STS_OK;
> unsigned int proc_bytes;
> - int status;
> + int status, intrc;
>
> req = (struct request *) cqr->callback_data;
> dasd_profile_end(cqr->block, cqr, req);
>
> + /*
> + * free_cp() returns the request block to its memory pool, so snapshot
> + * everything still needed from cqr before calling it - another CPU can
> + * reallocate and overwrite the block right after.
> + */
> proc_bytes = cqr->proc_bytes;
> + intrc = cqr->intrc;
> status = cqr->block->base->discipline->free_cp(cqr, req);
> if (status < 0)
> error = errno_to_blk_status(status);
> else if (status == 0) {
> - switch (cqr->intrc) {
> + switch (intrc) {
> case -EPERM:
> /*
> * DASD doesn't implement SCSI/NVMe reservations, but it
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but since we are fixing a use-after-free
around free_cp() returning the block to the pool, does
dasd_flush_block_queue() have a similar problem?
drivers/s390/block/dasd.c:dasd_flush_block_queue() {
...
__dasd_cleanup_cqr(cqr);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cqr->dq->lock, flags);
...
}
Once __dasd_cleanup_cqr(cqr) completes, free_cp() has been called and
the cqr memory block might be reallocated by another thread. Does the
subsequent access to cqr->dq->lock dereference freed memory?
[Severity: High]
This is also a pre-existing issue, but is there a use-after-free on req->q
later in __dasd_cleanup_cqr() and dasd_request_done()?
drivers/s390/block/dasd.c:__dasd_cleanup_cqr() {
...
blk_mq_end_request(req, error);
blk_mq_run_hw_queues(req->q, true);
...
}
The blk_mq_end_request() call completes the request, meaning the block
layer can instantly reallocate or poison the memory backing req. Does
accessing req->q on the next line dereference this potentially freed
memory?
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does the error path in
dasd_generic_requeue_all_requests() expose the request to a concurrent
use-after-free?
drivers/s390/block/dasd.c:dasd_generic_requeue_all_requests() {
...
_dasd_requeue_request(cqr);
list_del_init(&cqr->blocklist);
cqr->block->base->discipline->free_cp(cqr,
(struct request *) cqr->callback_data);
...
}
The _dasd_requeue_request(cqr) call invokes blk_mq_requeue_request(req, true),
handing the request back to the block layer and asynchronously kicking the
hardware queue. Can another thread immediately dispatch and complete the
request before free_cp() iterates over the request's bios?
[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but can dataless requests cause a null pointer
dereference in dasd_fba_free_cp()?
drivers/s390/block/dasd_fba.c:dasd_fba_free_cp() {
...
rq_for_each_segment(bv, req, iter) {
dst = bvec_virt(&bv);
for (off = 0; off < bv.bv_len; off += blksize) {
...
}
Operations like REQ_OP_DISCARD and REQ_OP_WRITE_ZEROES have no data
buffers (bio->bi_io_vec is null) but can have a non-zero bi_size. The
rq_for_each_segment() macro expands to bio_for_each_segment(), which
attempts to fetch the current segment from the null bi_io_vec. Should
this iteration be guarded with a check for blk_rq_has_data(req)?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260805111612.1285190-1-sth@linux.ibm.com?part=4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-05 13:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-05 11:15 [PATCH 00/19] s390/dasd: ESE Performance improvements Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 11:15 ` [PATCH 01/19] s390/dasd: Do not complete a failed ESE read as successful Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 11:48 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:15 ` [PATCH 02/19] s390/dasd: Propagate partial completion length across ERP recovery Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 12:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:15 ` [PATCH 03/19] s390/dasd: Guard sysfs discipline callbacks against unallocated private data Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 12:44 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:15 ` [PATCH 04/19] s390/dasd: Snapshot intrc before freeing the request block Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 13:06 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-05 11:15 ` [PATCH 05/19] s390/dasd: Optimize max blocks per request for track alignment Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 13:10 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:15 ` [PATCH 06/19] s390/dasd: Use GFP_KERNEL in dasd_alloc_device() Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 13:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 07/19] s390/dasd: Add defines for the Extended Address Volume track address Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 13:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 08/19] s390/dasd: Add infrastructure for ESE full-track write Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 14:02 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 09/19] s390/dasd: Add range-based format-track collision detection Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 15:11 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 10/19] s390/dasd: Extend prepare_itcw() to support WRITE_FULL_TRACK Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 15:39 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 11/19] s390/dasd: Add dasd_eckd_build_cp_tpm_writefulltrack() Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 15:53 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 12/19] s390/dasd: Use WRITE_FULL_TRACK in ESE format handler Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 16:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 13/19] s390/dasd: Add full_track_bias to control fulltrack write mode Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 16:41 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 14/19] s390/dasd: Derive adaptive ESE fulltrack heuristic from ft_bias Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 16:48 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 15/19] s390/dasd: Stamp a format label into newly formatted volumes Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 17:14 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 16/19] s390/dasd: Detect ESE volumes from the on-disk format label Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 19:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 17/19] s390/dasd: Report ESE capability and format mode at device online Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 19:44 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 18/19] s390/dasd: Re-enable discard support for ESE volumes Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 20:04 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 11:16 ` [PATCH 19/19] s390/dasd: Read cached unit address and LSS in the CCW build path Stefan Haberland
2026-08-05 20:31 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-05 12:32 ` [PATCH 00/19] s390/dasd: ESE Performance improvements Jens Axboe
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=20260805130640.E10B21F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=agordeev@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 \
--cc=sth@linux.ibm.com \
/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