From: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] scsi: scsi_debug: Map the region written by WRITE ATOMIC (16)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 16:01:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqvy0OAEDrjagXHj@ryzen> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260917131251.445AC1F000FF@smtp.kernel.org>
On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 01:12:50PM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [High] scsi_debug: ABBA deadlock between resp_atomic_write() and resp_comp_write()
> - [Medium] scsi_debug: TOCTOU race in resp_atomic_write() via double evaluation
> --
>
> commit d00845f77d0b11824b6bd723b3a99d9e2026b838
> Author: Niklas Cassel <cassel@kernel.org>
>
> scsi: scsi_debug: Map the region written by WRITE ATOMIC (16)
>
> When logical block provisioning is enabled, commands that write user data mark
> the region in the provisioning map. WRITE ATOMIC (16) leaves the map untouched,
> so this patch calls map_region() and takes the metadata write lock across the
> access.
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> > index 64f32d97455d6..33f2df26e5af7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> > +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_debug.c
> [ ... ]
> > @@ -6228,7 +6229,18 @@ static int resp_atomic_write(struct scsi_cmnd *scp,
> > }
> > }
> >
> > + if (scsi_debug_lbp()) {
> > + sdeb_meta_write_lock(sip);
> > + meta_data_locked = true;
> > + }
> > +
> > ret = do_device_access(sip, scp, 0, lba, len, 0, true, true);
>
> [Severity: High]
> Does this code introduce a lock inversion deadlock with resp_comp_write()?
>
> Here in resp_atomic_write(), the metadata lock is acquired before calling
> do_device_access(), which acquires the data lock:
>
> resp_atomic_write()
> sdeb_meta_write_lock(sip);
> do_device_access()
> sdeb_data_lock(sip, true)
> sdeb_data_write_lock(sip);
>
> However, in resp_comp_write(), the locks are acquired in the reverse order:
>
> resp_comp_write()
> sdeb_data_write_lock(sip);
> sdeb_meta_write_lock(sip);
Well, this seems to be a pre-existing problem, since resp_write_dt0() takes
the locks in the same order as resp_atomic_write().
It looks like resp_comp_write() is the only one who takes the locks in opposite
order, so the fix is probably to swap the order in resp_comp_write().
>
> Could concurrent execution of write atomic (16) and compare and write
> commands to the same target cause the scsi processing kworkers to deadlock?
>
> > + if (unlikely(scsi_debug_lbp()))
> > + map_region(sip, lba, len);
>
> [Severity: Medium]
> Could this result in a race condition due to evaluating scsi_debug_lbp() twice?
>
> If an administrator modifies /sys/bus/pseudo/drivers/scsi_debug/fake_rw while
> a write atomic (16) command is executing, the first evaluation could return
> false, bypassing the lock acquisition. If the second evaluation then returns
> true, map_region() would be executed without the metadata lock being held.
>
> Could this be fixed by caching the result of the first evaluation,
> or checking meta_data_locked instead?
Sure, but this is also a pre-existing problem, since resp_write_dt0() looks
exactly the same.
But sure, can introduce a local variable in all functions that call
scsi_debug_lbp(), so that it is never evaluated twice.
Kind regards,
Niklas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-17 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-17 12:54 [PATCH v3 0/6] scsi: scsi_debug: fix zoned write validation Niklas Cassel
2026-09-17 12:54 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] scsi: scsi_debug: Report the residual of a write Niklas Cassel
2026-09-17 13:04 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-17 13:06 ` Damien Le Moal
2026-09-17 12:54 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] scsi: scsi_debug: Do not write a partial physical block Niklas Cassel
2026-09-17 13:11 ` Damien Le Moal
2026-09-17 13:47 ` Niklas Cassel
2026-09-17 12:54 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] scsi: scsi_debug: Advance the write pointer over the data written Niklas Cassel
2026-09-17 13:13 ` Damien Le Moal
2026-09-17 12:54 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] scsi: scsi_debug: Enforce physical block alignment of zoned writes Niklas Cassel
2026-09-17 13:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-17 12:54 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] scsi: scsi_debug: Map the region written by WRITE ATOMIC (16) Niklas Cassel
2026-09-17 13:12 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-17 14:01 ` Niklas Cassel [this message]
2026-09-17 13:14 ` Damien Le Moal
2026-09-17 12:54 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] scsi: scsi_debug: Validate zone access for " Niklas Cassel
2026-09-17 13:15 ` Damien Le Moal
2026-09-17 13:05 ` [PATCH v3 0/6] scsi: scsi_debug: fix zoned write validation Damien Le Moal
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=aqvy0OAEDrjagXHj@ryzen \
--to=cassel@kernel.org \
--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