From: Ingo Rohloff <ingo.rohloff@lauterbach.com>
To: Neill Kapron <nkapron@google.com>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
me@samcday.com, michael.bommarito@gmail.com,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] usb: gadget: f_fs: register cancellation handler only after request queueing
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2026 17:19:57 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261109171957.2cf2bcbb@ingpc2.intern.lauterbach.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261109123140.7e57597b@ingpc2.intern.lauterbach.com>
Hello Neill,
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2026 22:47:48 +0000
> Neill Kapron <nkapron@google.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2026 at 02:09:07PM +0200, Ingo Rohloff wrote:
> > > Call kiocb_set_cancel_fn() only after usb_ep_queue() completes
> > > successfully.
> > > ...
> >
> > Unfortunately, I don't think this is safe. The cancel handler has to be
> > set before the request is queued.
> ...
> You should **NOT** call "kiocb_set_cancel_fn(...)",
> before the request is successfully queued via "usb_ep_queue()".
I just had another look at the code and I am even more convinced than
before that commit ("usb: gadget: f_fs: Fix Use-After-Free in
AIO error path") is wrong. Especially this code part
if (res == -EIOCBQUEUED)
return res;
/* Comment by Ingo: Code here menans there was an error */
if (p->aio) {
kiocb->ki_complete(kiocb, res);
mmdrop(p->mm);
kfree(p);
return -EIOCBQUEUED;
}
Returning "-EIOCBQUEUED" when in fact nothing has been queued
(because of an error) doesn't make any sense to me.
As far as I can tell, the whole point of returning "-EIOCBQUEUED" is to tell
aio.c that something is "in progress"; which is exactly the opposite of
what's happening here.
Returning -EIOCBQUEUED is just a hack here, to prevent
"aio_rw_done(...)" (in aio.c) from calling "kiocb->ki_complete(...)" after
ffs_epfile_write_iter/ffs_epfile_read_iter
has returned.
with best regards
Ingo
On Mon, 9 Nov 2026 12:31:40 +0100
Ingo Rohloff <ingo.rohloff@lauterbach.com> wrote:
> Hello Neill,
>
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2026 22:47:48 +0000
> Neill Kapron <nkapron@google.com> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2026 at 02:09:07PM +0200, Ingo Rohloff wrote:
> > > Call kiocb_set_cancel_fn() only after usb_ep_queue() completes
> > > successfully.
> > > ...
> >
> > Unfortunately, I don't think this is safe. The cancel handler has to be
> > set before the request is queued.
>
> Why do you think, that the cancel handler has to be set before
> the request is queued?
>
> I can't find any reason for this.
>
> I will describe this in terms of an AIO write (read is the same),
> referring to the current kernel (without my patch):
>
> The request enters the kernel via
> SYSCALL_DEFINE3(io_submit
> ...
> io_submit_one(ctx, user_iocb, false);
> __io_submit_one(ctx, &iocb, user_iocb, req, compat);
> ...
> case IOCB_CMD_PWRITE:
> return aio_write(&req->rw, iocb, false, compat);
> aio_write
> ...
> aio_rw_done(req, file->f_op->write_iter(req, &iter));
> file->f_op->write_iter == ffs_epfile_write_iter
> ffs_epfile_write_iter(struct kiocb *kiocb, struct iov_iter *from)
> kiocb_set_cancel_fn(...)
> ffs_epfile_io(...)
> ret = usb_ep_queue(ep->ep, req, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
>
> I can't see why you should need to call "kiocb_set_cancel_fn(...)"
> before you call "usb_ep_queue()".
> In fact I think that's exactly wrong:
> You should **NOT** call "kiocb_set_cancel_fn(...)",
> before the request is successfully queued via "usb_ep_queue()".
>
> Unfortunately f_fs.c seems the only place where "kiocb_set_cancel_fn()"
> is used, so there is no other code to compare to.
>
> If "usb_ep_queue()" fails, then "ffs_epfile_io()"
> will **NOT** return -EIOCBQUEUED.
>
> This in turn means the code in "aio_rw_done(...)"
> will call "req->ki_complete(req, ret)", because that's
> what "aio_rw_done(...)" does, if you **DO NOT** return -EIOCBQUEUED.
>
> As far as I can tell, this is exactly what we want:
> The request is completed with an error,
> which indicates that the request was not queued.
>
> Because the request is completed, why should you ever
> set a cancel handler for it?
> So why should you call kiocb_set_cancel_fn before the
> request is queued successfully?
>
> with best regards
> Ingo
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dipl.-Inform.
Ingo ROHLOFF
Senior Staff Engineer
phone +49 8102 9876-142 - ingo.rohloff@lauterbach.com
Lauterbach Engineering GmbH & Co. KG
Altlaufstrasse 40, 85635 Hoehenkirchen-Siegertsbrunn, GERMANY
www.lauterbach.com
Registered Office: Hoehenkirchen-Siegertsbrunn, Germany,
Local Court: Munich, HRA 87406, VAT ID: DE246770537,
Managing Directors: Stephan Lauterbach, Dr. Thomas Ullmann
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-09 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-01 12:09 [PATCH 0/3] usb: gadget: f_fs: cancellation and mm fixes Ingo Rohloff
2026-09-01 12:09 ` [PATCH 1/3] usb: gadget: f_fs: simplify error handling using goto Ingo Rohloff
2026-11-06 23:13 ` Neill Kapron
2026-09-01 12:09 ` [PATCH 2/3] usb: gadget: f_fs: register cancellation handler only after request queueing Ingo Rohloff
2026-11-06 22:47 ` Neill Kapron
2026-11-09 11:31 ` Ingo Rohloff
2026-11-09 16:19 ` Ingo Rohloff [this message]
2026-09-01 12:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] usb: gadget: f_fs: Fix mmgrab()/mmdrop() balance Ingo Rohloff
2026-10-30 8:19 ` Hongyu Xie
2026-11-06 22:53 ` Neill Kapron
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=20261109171957.2cf2bcbb@ingpc2.intern.lauterbach.com \
--to=ingo.rohloff@lauterbach.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=me@samcday.com \
--cc=michael.bommarito@gmail.com \
--cc=nkapron@google.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/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