From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>
To: Vasiliy Kulikov <segooon@gmail.com>
Cc: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
Benny Halevy <bhalevy@panasas.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@suse.de>,
Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
osd-dev@open-osd.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/14] scsi: osd: fix device_register() error handling
Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2010 17:32:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C962CF3.9000601@panasas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1284900907-24621-1-git-send-email-segooon@gmail.com>
On 09/19/2010 02:55 PM, Vasiliy Kulikov wrote:
> If device_register() fails then call put_device().
> See comment to device_register.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vasiliy Kulikov <segooon@gmail.com>
> ---
> compile tested.
>
> drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c | 4 +++-
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c b/drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c
> index cefb2c0..3e0edc2 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/osd/osd_uld.c
> @@ -474,7 +474,7 @@ static int osd_probe(struct device *dev)
> error = device_register(&oud->class_dev);
> if (error) {
> OSD_ERR("device_register failed => %d\n", error);
> - goto err_put_cdev;
> + goto err_put_device;
> }
>
> get_device(&oud->class_dev);
> @@ -482,6 +482,8 @@ static int osd_probe(struct device *dev)
> OSD_INFO("osd_probe %s\n", disk->disk_name);
> return 0;
>
> +err_put_device:
> + put_device(&oud->class_dev);
I'm not sure we can do this here. We might need to disregard the
comment at device_register. Because this put_ will try to call the
registered __release which will try to free the oud structure which
has the ->class_dev embedded, and now we have a double free.
But I will add a fat comment if all agree.
I'm assuming that if the device_register has failed then we are not
yet on any exposed system lists. (proof of we don't need to call
device_unregister). Since we don't yet let anyone see this device
we can go head and free it regardless of it's initialized ref-count
== 1. The motivation here is to tear down the device without any
possible users. Is that guaranteed? From my code audit it is.
> err_put_cdev:
> cdev_del(&oud->cdev);
> err_put_disk:
And I think device_register has a very bad API side effect with this put.
If you are going to monitor all places that do not call put_device. Why
not go to all places that do, and remove them and fix device_register.
Do a majority vote. What is done more? put_device called or not called.
Thanks
Boaz
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-09-19 15:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-19 12:55 [PATCH 10/14] scsi: osd: fix device_register() error handling Vasiliy Kulikov
2010-09-19 14:26 ` Dan Carpenter
2010-09-19 14:39 ` Vasiliy Kulikov
[not found] ` <20100919143948.GA4866@albatros>
2010-09-19 15:12 ` Dan Carpenter
2010-09-20 11:58 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-20 15:10 ` Greg KH
2010-09-20 15:13 ` Greg KH
2010-09-20 15:21 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-20 15:42 ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-09-20 15:55 ` James Bottomley
2010-09-20 16:31 ` Boaz Harrosh
2010-09-19 15:32 ` Boaz Harrosh [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=4C962CF3.9000601@panasas.com \
--to=bharrosh@panasas.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@suse.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhalevy@panasas.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=osd-dev@open-osd.org \
--cc=segooon@gmail.com \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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