From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Yu Zhang" <yuz08559@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: target: tcm_loop: fix tl_nexus use-after-free on concurrent nexus drop
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2026 01:29:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-170672@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261014011739.45941-1-yuz08559@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] tcm_loop: UAF in I/O path due to port link and nexus drop TOCTOU race
--
commit f5acf49b795a91429ba7f28b4f3ce2e9fca1884a
Author: Yu Zhang <yuz08559@gmail.com>
scsi: target: tcm_loop: fix tl_nexus use-after-free on concurrent nexus drop
tcm_loop keeps the per-TPG I_T nexus in tl_tpg->tl_nexus with no lock,
refcount or RCU protection. The configfs control path that creates and
destroys it is not serialized: configfs runs concurrent ->store() calls
in parallel (configfs_write_iter() only holds a per-open-file
buffer->mutex, and flush_write_buffer() takes frag_sem for read), so two
writers to the nexus attribute, or a writer racing the transport_status
or nexus show attribute, all touch tl_nexus concurrently.
[ ... ]
The I/O submission path (tcm_loop_target_queue_cmd(), tcm_loop_issue_tmr())
reads tl_nexus without the mutex and is left unchanged: it can run in
atomic context, and it is already serialized against drop by
tl_tpg_port_count plus SCSI-midlayer draining (a live scsi_device keeps
tl_tpg_port_count > 0, which makes tcm_loop_drop_nexus() return -EPERM).
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhang <yuz08559@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Yu Zhang <yuz08559@gmail.com>
> diff --git a/drivers/target/loopback/tcm_loop.c b/drivers/target/loopback/tcm_loop.c
> index d29830b951f75..980e9e65b788c 100644
> --- a/drivers/target/loopback/tcm_loop.c
> +++ b/drivers/target/loopback/tcm_loop.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -701,17 +708,23 @@ static int tcm_loop_drop_nexus(
> struct se_session *se_sess;
> struct tcm_loop_nexus *tl_nexus;
>
> + mutex_lock(&tpg->tl_nexus_mutex);
> tl_nexus = tpg->tl_nexus;
> - if (!tl_nexus)
> + if (!tl_nexus) {
> + mutex_unlock(&tpg->tl_nexus_mutex);
> return -ENODEV;
> + }
>
> se_sess = tl_nexus->se_sess;
> - if (!se_sess)
> + if (!se_sess) {
> + mutex_unlock(&tpg->tl_nexus_mutex);
> return -ENODEV;
> + }
>
> if (atomic_read(&tpg->tl_tpg_port_count)) {
> pr_err("Unable to remove TCM_Loop I_T Nexus with active TPG port count: %d\n",
> atomic_read(&tpg->tl_tpg_port_count));
> + mutex_unlock(&tpg->tl_nexus_mutex);
> return -EPERM;
> }
>
[Severity: High]
Does this port count check prevent a concurrent port link from immediately
incrementing the count and issuing I/O before the nexus is freed?
While this check is under tl_nexus_mutex, tcm_loop_port_link() increments
the port count and calls scsi_add_device() without holding tl_nexus_mutex:
drivers/target/loopback/tcm_loop.c:tcm_loop_port_link() {
...
atomic_inc_mb(&tl_tpg->tl_tpg_port_count);
/*
* Add Linux/SCSI struct scsi_device by HCTL
*/
scsi_add_device(tl_hba->sh, 0, tl_tpg->tl_tpgt, lun->unpacked_lun);
...
}
If tcm_loop_drop_nexus() sees a count of 0 and proceeds to clear and free
tl_nexus, could a concurrent configfs symlink creation (tcm_loop_port_link)
transition the count to 1 and queue INQUIRY commands via scsi_add_device()?
Since scsi_add_device() synchronously queues commands via
tcm_loop_target_queue_cmd(), which locklessly reads tl_tpg->tl_nexus, could
the I/O path dereference the newly freed tl_nexus->se_sess if it races with
tcm_loop_drop_nexus() clearing and freeing it?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261014011739.45941-1-yuz08559@gmail.com?part=1
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-14 1:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-14 1:17 [PATCH] scsi: target: tcm_loop: fix tl_nexus use-after-free on concurrent nexus drop Yu Zhang
2026-10-14 1:29 ` 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=sashiko-outbox-170672@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yuz08559@gmail.com \
/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