Re: [PATCH v1] driver core: Use list_del_init to replace list_del at device_links_purge()

Greg KH
2020-01-08T15:44:32Z

On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 02:50:54PM +0000, John Garry wrote:
> On 08/01/2020 12:26, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 08, 2020 at 07:34:04PM +0800, Luo Jiaxing wrote:
> > > We found that enabling kernel compilation options CONFIG_SCSI_ENCLOSURE and
> > > CONFIG_ENCLOSURE_SERVICES, repeated initialization and deletion of the same
> > > SCSI device will cause system panic, as follows:
> > > [72.425705] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address
> > > dead000000000108
> > > ...
> > > [72.595093] Call trace:
> > > [72.597532] device_del + 0x194 / 0x3a0
> > > [72.601012] enclosure_remove_device + 0xbc / 0xf8
> > > [72.605445] ses_intf_remove + 0x9c / 0xd8
> > > [72.609185] device_del + 0xf8 / 0x3a0
> > > [72.612576] device_unregister + 0x14 / 0x30
> > > [72.616489] __scsi_remove_device + 0xf4 / 0x140
> > > [72.620747] scsi_remove_device + 0x28 / 0x40
> > > [72.624745] scsi_remove_target + 0x1c8 / 0x220
> > >
> > > After analysis, we see that in the error scenario, the ses module has the
> > > following calling sequence:
> > > device_register() -> device_del() -> device_add() -> device_del().
> > > The first call to device_del() is fine, but the second call to device_del()
> > > will cause a system panic.
> >
> > Is this all on the same device structure? If so, that's not ok, you
> > can't do that, once device_del() is called on the memory location, you
> > can not call device_add() on it again.
> >
> > How are you triggering this from userspace?
>
> This can be triggered by causing the SCSI device to be lost, found, and lost
> again:
>
> root@(none)$ pwd
> /sys/class/sas_phy/phy-0:0:2
> root@(none)$ echo 0 > enable
> [ 48.828139] sas: smp_execute_task_sg: task to dev 500e004aaaaaaa1f
> response: 0x0 status 0x2
> root@(none)$
> [ 48.837040] sas: ex 500e004aaaaaaa1f phy02 change count has changed
> [ 48.846961] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Synchronizing SCSI cache
> [ 48.852120] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Synchronize Cache(10) failed: Result:
> hostbyte=0x04 driverbyte=0x00
> [ 48.898111] hisi_sas_v3_hw 0000:74:02.0: dev[2:1] is gone
>
> root@(none)$ echo 1 > enable
> root@(none)$
> [ 51.967416] sas: ex 500e004aaaaaaa1f phy02 change count has changed
> [ 51.974022] hisi_sas_v3_hw 0000:74:02.0: dev[7:1] found
> [ 51.991305] scsi 0:0:5:0: Direct-Access SEAGATE ST2000NM0045 N004
> PQ: 0 ANSI: 6
> [ 52.003609] sd 0:0:5:0: [sda] 3907029168 512-byte logical blocks: (2.00
> TB/1.82 TiB)
> [ 52.012010] sd 0:0:5:0: [sda] Write Protect is off
> [ 52.022643] sd 0:0:5:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled,
> supports DPO and FUA
> [ 52.052429] sda: sda1
> [ 52.064439] sd 0:0:5:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk
>
> root@(none)$ echo 0 > enable
> [ 54.112100] sas: smp_execute_task_sg: task to dev 500e004aaaaaaa1f
> response: 0x0 status 0x2
> root@(none)$ [ 54.120909] sas: ex 500e004aaaaaaa1f phy02 change count has
> changed
> [ 54.130202] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address
> dead000000000108
> [ 54.138110] Mem abort info:
> [ 54.140892] ESR = 0x96000044
> [ 54.143936] EC = 0x25: DABT (current EL), IL = 32 bits
> [ 54.149236] SET = 0, FnV = 0
> [ 54.152278] EA = 0, S1PTW = 0
> [ 54.155408] Data abort info:
> [ 54.158275] ISV = 0, ISS = 0x00000044
> [ 54.162098] CM = 0, WnR = 1
> [ 54.165055] [dead000000000108] address between user and kernel address
> ranges
> [ 54.172179] Internal error: Oops: 96000044 [#1] PREEMPT SMP
> [ 54.177737] Modules linked in:
> [ 54.180780] CPU: 5 PID: 741 Comm: kworker/u192:2 Not tainted
> 5.5.0-rc5-dirty #1535
> [ 54.188334] Hardware name: Huawei D06 /D06, BIOS Hisilicon D06 UEFI RC0 -
> V1.16.01 03/15/2019
> [ 54.196847] Workqueue: 0000:74:02.0_disco_q sas_revalidate_domain
> [ 54.202927] pstate: 60c00009 (nZCv daif +PAN +UAO)
> [ 54.207705] pc : device_del+0x194/0x398
> [ 54.211527] lr : device_del+0x190/0x398
> [ 54.215349] sp : ffff80001cc7bb20
> [ 54.218650] x29: ffff80001cc7bb20 x28: ffff0023be042188
> [ 54.223948] x27: ffff0023c04c0000 x26: ffff0023be042000
> [ 54.229246] x25: ffff8000119f0f30 x24: ffff0023be268a30
> [ 54.234544] x23: ffff0023be268018 x22: ffff800011879000
> [ 54.239842] x21: ffff8000119f0000 x20: ffff8000119f06e0
> [ 54.245140] x19: ffff0023be268990 x18: 0000000000000004
> [ 54.250438] x17: 0000000000000007 x16: 0000000000000001
> [ 54.255736] x15: ffff0023eac13610 x14: ffff0023eb74a7f8
> [ 54.261034] x13: 0000000000000000 x12: ffff0023eac13610
> [ 54.266332] x11: ffff0023eb74a6c8 x10: 0000000000000000
> [ 54.271630] x9 : ffff0023eac13618 x8 : 0000000040040000
> [ 54.276928] x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : ffff0023be268a90
> [ 54.282226] x5 : ffff0023be74aa00 x4 : 0000000000000000
> [ 54.287524] x3 : ffff8000119f0f30 x2 : dead000000000100
> [ 54.292821] x1 : dead000000000122 x0 : 0000000000000000
> [ 54.298119] Call trace:
> [ 54.300553] device_del+0x194/0x398
> [ 54.304030] enclosure_remove_device+0xb4/0x100
> [ 54.308548] ses_intf_remove+0x98/0xd8
> [ 54.312283] device_del+0xfc/0x398
> [ 54.315671] device_unregister+0x14/0x30
> [ 54.319580] __scsi_remove_device+0xf0/0x130
> [ 54.323836] scsi_remove_device+0x28/0x40
> [ 54.327832] scsi_remove_target+0x1bc/0x250
> [ 54.332002] sas_rphy_remove+0x5c/0x60
> [ 54.335738] sas_rphy_delete+0x14/0x28
> [ 54.339473] sas_destruct_devices+0x5c/0x98
> [ 54.343642] sas_revalidate_domain+0xa0/0x178
> [ 54.347986] process_one_work+0x1e0/0x358
> [ 54.351982] worker_thread+0x40/0x488
> [ 54.355631] kthread+0x118/0x120
> [ 54.358846] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
> [ 54.362410] Code: 91028278 aa1903e0 9415f01f a94c0662 (f9000441)
> [ 54.368489] ---[ end trace 38c672fcf89c95f7 ]---
>
> I tested on v5.4 and no such issue, but maybe the driver core changes have
> exposed a ses/enclosure issue.
>
> Checking:
>
> int enclosure_remove_device(struct enclosure_device *edev, struct device
> *dev)
> {
> struct enclosure_component *cdev;
> int i;
>
> if (!edev || !dev)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> for (i = 0; i < edev->components; i++) {
> cdev = &edev->component[i];
> if (cdev->dev == dev) {
> enclosure_remove_links(cdev);
> device_del(&cdev->cdev);
> put_device(dev);
> cdev->dev = NULL;
> return device_add(&cdev->cdev);
> }
> }
> return -ENODEV;
> }
>
> This has device_del(&cdev->cdev) followed by device_add(&cdev->cdev).

Ugh, that's ripe for problems, as you found.

Yes, your patch will fix this pattern, but the larger problem is that
this sequence might not really work as something else could have had a
reference to the structure (rare, but could happen.)

> This cdev.dev memory looks to be dynamically allocated for the lifetime of
> the enclosure_device.

ick.

SCSI people, what do you think? This "enclosure" code was yours...

thanks,

greg k-h