From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Yuho Choi" <dbgh9129@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] scsi: qla2xxx: Cancel qpair work before freeing queues
Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2026 23:16:06 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260802231606.B89011F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260802230039.586918-1-dbgh9129@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
New issues:
- [High] The patch adds `cancel_work_sync(&qpair->q_work)` before unregistering the MSI-X interrupt, leaving a race window where the active interrupt handler can re-queue the work, leading to a Use-After-Free when the queue pair is subsequently freed.
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] If deleting the request or response queue fails, `qla2xxx_delete_qpair()` bails out early, leaking the queue pair's software resources.
- [High] `request_irq()` is called before `INIT_WORK(&qpair->q_work, qla_do_work)`, allowing an early interrupt to enqueue a zero-allocated (uninitialized) `work_struct`.
- [High] Software memory and DMA rings for queues are permanently leaked when `qpairs_req_created` is false.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v1] scsi: qla2xxx: Cancel qpair work before freeing queues ---
commit 6aefba2c9206876be8f5e675b0612f13ef6a77b5
Author: Yuho Choi <dbgh9129@gmail.com>
scsi: qla2xxx: Cancel qpair work before freeing queues
This commit fixes an issue where the qpair response interrupt handler could
queue work with a deleted qpair context. It does this by marking the qpair
for deletion and cancelling its work earlier in the teardown and error paths.
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c
> index e746c9274cded..d5cd33e84720e 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_init.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -10028,6 +10034,8 @@ int qla2xxx_delete_qpair(struct scsi_qla_host *vha, struct qla_qpair *qpair)
> struct qla_hw_data *ha = qpair->hw;
>
> qpair->delete_in_progress = 1;
> + if (qpair->hw->wq)
> + cancel_work_sync(&qpair->q_work);
[Severity: High]
Does this leave a window where an interrupt can re-queue the work before the
interrupt is unregistered?
Because qla2xxx_msix_rsp_q() unconditionally queues the work without checking
delete_in_progress:
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_isr.c:qla2xxx_msix_rsp_q() {
...
queue_work(ha->wq, &qpair->q_work);
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
And the interrupt isn't unregistered until later in the teardown when
qla25xx_delete_rsp_que() calls free_irq(), could a late interrupt fire right
after cancel_work_sync() and re-queue the work, leading to a use-after-free
when the qpair is eventually freed?
>
> qla_free_buf_pool(qpair);
>
> ret = qla25xx_delete_req_que(vha, qpair->req);
> if (ret != QLA_SUCCESS)
> goto fail;
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but could this early bailout leak the queue
pair's software resources?
If qla25xx_delete_req_que() times out or fails (e.g., due to unresponsive
hardware) and returns QLA_FUNCTION_FAILED, it takes the goto fail path and
returns early. Will this skip freeing the remaining DMA buffers, kernel
structures, and MSI-X vectors that are typically cleaned up unconditionally
at the bottom of qla2xxx_delete_qpair()?
I also noticed a few pre-existing issues in related code:
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_mid.c:qla25xx_create_rsp_que() {
...
ret = qla25xx_request_irq(ha, qpair, qpair->msix);
if (ret)
goto que_failed;
if (startqp) {
...
}
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but can an early interrupt
trigger a panic here?
Since the interrupt is enabled by request_irq() before INIT_WORK() initializes
qpair->q_work at the end of the function, could an interrupt fire immediately
and cause the handler to enqueue a zero-allocated (uninitialized) work_struct,
leading to a NULL pointer dereference in the workqueue worker thread?
drivers/scsi/qla2xxx/qla_mid.c:qla25xx_delete_req_que() {
...
if (req && vha->flags.qpairs_req_created) {
req->options |= BIT_0;
ret = qla25xx_init_req_que(vha, req);
if (ret != QLA_SUCCESS)
return QLA_FUNCTION_FAILED;
qla25xx_free_req_que(vha, req);
}
return ret;
}
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does this function permanently leak memory
when qpairs_req_created is false?
If a queue pair is created with startqp=false, the rings are allocated but
vha->flags.qpairs_req_created remains unset. During teardown, this function
evaluates the flag to false, returns QLA_SUCCESS early, and completely skips
qla25xx_free_req_que(). Will this leak the DMA rings (req->ring) and queue
structures upon driver unbind?
The same pattern also exists in qla25xx_delete_rsp_que() when
qpairs_rsp_created is false.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260802230039.586918-1-dbgh9129@gmail.com?part=1
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-02 23:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-02 23:00 [PATCH v1] scsi: qla2xxx: Cancel qpair work before freeing queues Yuho Choi
2026-08-02 23:16 ` 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=20260802231606.B89011F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=dbgh9129@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@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