From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc: Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>,
linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
James Bottomley <jbottomley@parallels.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Chanho Min <chanho.min@lge.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix a use-after-free triggered by device removal
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 09:26:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50518AC3.2070009@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120912205338.GV7677@google.com>
On 09/12/12 22:53, Tejun Heo wrote:
> The problem at hand IIUC is ->request_fn() being invoked when
> request_queue itself is alive but the underlying driver is gone. We
> already make sure that a new request is not queued once drain is
> complete but there's no guarantee about calling into ->request_fn()
> and this is what you want to fix, right?
Actually it's a slightly different issue that I want to address, namely
that with the current implementation of the block layer and the SCSI
core it's possible that blk_cleanup_queue() finishes after
scsi_request_fn() has unlocked the queue lock and before it obtains the
queue lock again.
The reason I'm proposing to add a counter in the block layer and not in
the SCSI core is because I think it would be useful for other
request-based block drivers too to be able to unlock the queue inside
their ->request_fn(). That would allow to reduce lock contention on the
request_queue lock for low-latency block drivers.
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-13 7:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-03 14:12 [PATCH] Fix a use-after-free triggered by device removal Bart Van Assche
2012-09-06 16:27 ` Michael Christie
2012-09-06 17:58 ` Bart Van Assche
2012-09-06 18:14 ` Mike Christie
2012-09-06 18:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2012-09-06 23:20 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-07 6:57 ` Bart Van Assche
2012-09-10 23:38 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-11 6:42 ` Bart Van Assche
2012-09-12 20:53 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-13 7:26 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2012-09-13 16:53 ` Tejun Heo
2012-09-13 18:27 ` Bart Van Assche
2012-09-13 19:25 ` Tejun Heo
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=50518AC3.2070009@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=chanho.min@lge.com \
--cc=jbottomley@parallels.com \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).