* [PATCH] usb: storage: don't hold dev_mutex across the max_lun control transfer
@ 2026-11-08 23:33 Shuai Liu
2026-11-08 23:45 ` sashiko-bot
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Shuai Liu @ 2026-11-08 23:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Stern, Greg Kroah-Hartman
Cc: linux-usb, usb-storage, linux-kernel, syzbot+30552b4cbe99d6d91306,
Shuai Liu
usb_stor_scan_dwork() acquires us->dev_mutex and then calls
usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun(), which issues a synchronous GET_MAX_LUN control
transfer (usb_stor_control_msg -> usb_control_msg, 10s timeout). The
reset and suspend callbacks (usb_stor_pre_reset / usb_stor_suspend) also
acquire us->dev_mutex, but they run while the USB core already holds the
device lock (udev->dev.mutex) during usb_reset_device() or disconnect.
This creates an AB-BA deadlock:
scan work reset/disconnect
--------- ----------------
mutex_lock(dev_mutex)
device_lock(udev) [USB core]
usb_control_msg() -- blocks waiting for
the device lock
mutex_lock(dev_mutex) [pre_reset]
-- blocks forever
syzbot reports this as a task hung in usb_stor_scan_dwork(), with
cancel_delayed_work_sync() in quiesce_and_remove_host() unable to make
progress.
Fix it by making usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun() self-contained: use a private
on-stack buffer and the usbcore usb_control_msg() helper instead of the
shared per-device resources (us->iobuf, us->cr, us->current_urb) that
also belong to the control thread and the reset path. With no shared
state touched, the transfer no longer needs us->dev_mutex.
In usb_stor_scan_dwork() call usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun() outside the lock
and only take us->dev_mutex briefly to publish us->max_lun (and the
SCSI host max_lun). us->recv_ctrl_pipe and us->ifnum are set during
probe and never change, so they are safe to read lockless.
Reported-by: syzbot+30552b4cbe99d6d91306@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=30552b4cbe99d6d91306
Signed-off-by: Shuai Liu <847807867@qq.com>
---
drivers/usb/storage/transport.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++----------
drivers/usb/storage/usb.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++----
2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c b/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
index 8de3015bce05..961595a6faca 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
@@ -1075,27 +1075,34 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(usb_stor_CB_transport);
/* Determine what the maximum LUN supported is */
int usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun(struct us_data *us)
{
+ u8 lun;
int result;
- /* issue the command */
- us->iobuf[0] = 0;
- result = usb_stor_control_msg(us, us->recv_ctrl_pipe,
- US_BULK_GET_MAX_LUN,
- USB_DIR_IN | USB_TYPE_CLASS |
+ /*
+ * Issue the GET_MAX_LUN request using a private buffer and the
+ * usbcore control-message helper. This avoids touching the shared
+ * per-device resources (us->iobuf, us->cr, us->current_urb) that are
+ * also used by the control thread and the reset path, so the caller
+ * does not need to hold us->dev_mutex while this (possibly sleeping)
+ * transfer runs.
+ */
+ result = usb_control_msg(us->pusb_dev, us->recv_ctrl_pipe,
+ US_BULK_GET_MAX_LUN,
+ USB_DIR_IN | USB_TYPE_CLASS |
USB_RECIP_INTERFACE,
- 0, us->ifnum, us->iobuf, 1, 10*HZ);
+ 0, us->ifnum, &lun, 1, 10 * HZ);
usb_stor_dbg(us, "GetMaxLUN command result is %d, data is %d\n",
- result, us->iobuf[0]);
+ result, lun);
/* If we have a successful request, return the result if valid. */
if (result > 0) {
- if (us->iobuf[0] <= US_BULK_MAX_LUN_LIMIT) {
- return us->iobuf[0];
+ if (lun <= US_BULK_MAX_LUN_LIMIT) {
+ return lun;
} else {
dev_info(&us->pusb_intf->dev,
"Max LUN %d is not valid, using 0 instead",
- us->iobuf[0]);
+ lun);
}
}
diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/usb.c b/drivers/usb/storage/usb.c
index 823a4b2e9033..43d333f3ec4f 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/storage/usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/storage/usb.c
@@ -980,19 +980,31 @@ static void usb_stor_scan_dwork(struct work_struct *work)
dev_dbg(dev, "starting scan\n");
- /* For bulk-only devices, determine the max LUN value */
+ /*
+ * For bulk-only devices, determine the max LUN value.
+ *
+ * usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun() performs a synchronous control transfer and
+ * must NOT run while holding us->dev_mutex: the reset and suspend
+ * callbacks acquire us->dev_mutex (via usb_stor_pre_reset() /
+ * usb_stor_suspend()) while the USB core holds the device lock, and a
+ * concurrent scan would then deadlock against them. The transfer now
+ * uses only private resources, so take the lock only to publish the
+ * result.
+ */
if (us->protocol == USB_PR_BULK &&
!(us->fflags & US_FL_SINGLE_LUN) &&
!(us->fflags & US_FL_SCM_MULT_TARG)) {
+ int max_lun = usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun(us);
+
mutex_lock(&us->dev_mutex);
- us->max_lun = usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun(us);
+ us->max_lun = max_lun;
/*
* Allow proper scanning of devices that present more than 8 LUNs
* While not affecting other devices that may need the previous
* behavior
*/
- if (us->max_lun >= 8)
- us_to_host(us)->max_lun = us->max_lun+1;
+ if (max_lun >= 8)
+ us_to_host(us)->max_lun = max_lun + 1;
mutex_unlock(&us->dev_mutex);
}
scsi_scan_host(us_to_host(us));
--
2.53.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH] usb: storage: don't hold dev_mutex across the max_lun control transfer
2026-11-08 23:33 [PATCH] usb: storage: don't hold dev_mutex across the max_lun control transfer Shuai Liu
@ 2026-11-08 23:45 ` sashiko-bot
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: sashiko-bot @ 2026-11-08 23:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Shuai Liu; +Cc: linux-usb
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential
issues to consider:
- [High] usb: storage: DMA from stack buffer in usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun()
- [High] usb: storage: unlocked usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun() races with reset
and I/O
- [Medium] usb: storage: uninitialized lun read in
usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun()
- [Medium] usb: storage: wrong timeout unit in usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun()
It also noticed 1 related pre-existing issue this patch does not
introduce:
- [High] usb: storage: scan_dwork race with usb_stor_disconnect() causes
hub stall [1]
--
commit 92856a6bb6e2428e581352525fb02cdea2d9e022
Author: Shuai Liu <847807867@qq.com>
usb: storage: don't hold dev_mutex across the max_lun control transfer
This commit changes usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun() to issue the GET_MAX_LUN
control transfer via usb_control_msg() using a stack variable and calls
it outside us->dev_mutex in usb_stor_scan_dwork().
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c b/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
> index 8de3015bce050..961595a6facad 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
> @@ -1075,27 +1075,34 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(usb_stor_CB_transport);
> /* Determine what the maximum LUN supported is */
> int usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun(struct us_data *us)
> {
> + u8 lun;
> int result;
>
> - /* issue the command */
> - us->iobuf[0] = 0;
> - result = usb_stor_control_msg(us, us->recv_ctrl_pipe,
> - US_BULK_GET_MAX_LUN,
> - USB_DIR_IN | USB_TYPE_CLASS |
> + /*
> + * Issue the GET_MAX_LUN request using a private buffer and the
> + * usbcore control-message helper. This avoids touching the shared
> + * per-device resources (us->iobuf, us->cr, us->current_urb) that are
> + * also used by the control thread and the reset path, so the caller
> + * does not need to hold us->dev_mutex while this (possibly sleeping)
> + * transfer runs.
> + */
> + result = usb_control_msg(us->pusb_dev, us->recv_ctrl_pipe,
> + US_BULK_GET_MAX_LUN,
> + USB_DIR_IN | USB_TYPE_CLASS |
> USB_RECIP_INTERFACE,
> - 0, us->ifnum, us->iobuf, 1, 10*HZ);
> + 0, us->ifnum, &lun, 1, 10 * HZ);
[Severity: High]
Does passing &lun to usb_control_msg() perform DMA into the kernel stack?
Unlike usb_control_msg_recv(), usb_control_msg() uses the caller's data
pointer directly as urb->transfer_buffer without copying to a heap buffer.
On DMA-capable host controllers, usb_hcd_map_urb_for_dma() rejects
stack-allocated transfer buffers with a WARN_ONCE() splat and returns
-EAGAIN, which makes usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun() fall back to 0 and breaks
multi-LUN detection.
[Severity: Medium]
Does usb_control_msg() also expect its timeout argument in milliseconds
rather than jiffies?
usb_stor_control_msg() took jiffies, whereas usb_control_msg() passes
timeout to usb_start_wait_urb() -> msecs_to_jiffies(). Passing 10 * HZ
shortens the timeout from 10 seconds to 1 second on CONFIG_HZ=100 kernels
(or 2.5 seconds on CONFIG_HZ=250), risking premature -ETIMEDOUT failures
on slow devices.
>
> usb_stor_dbg(us, "GetMaxLUN command result is %d, data is %d\n",
> - result, us->iobuf[0]);
> + result, lun);
[Severity: Medium]
Can usb_stor_dbg() read uninitialized stack memory from lun when
usb_control_msg() fails or transfers 0 bytes?
Previously us->iobuf[0] was zero-initialized before the transfer. Here
lun is uninitialized, so when a single-LUN device stalls GET_MAX_LUN
(-EPIPE) or returns a zero-length packet, usb_stor_dbg() reads an
uninitialized value before the result > 0 check.
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/usb.c b/drivers/usb/storage/usb.c
> index 823a4b2e9033b..43d333f3ec4fe 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/storage/usb.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/storage/usb.c
> @@ -980,19 +980,31 @@ static void usb_stor_scan_dwork(struct work_struct *work)
>
> dev_dbg(dev, "starting scan\n");
>
> - /* For bulk-only devices, determine the max LUN value */
> + /*
> + * For bulk-only devices, determine the max LUN value.
> + *
> + * usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun() performs a synchronous control transfer and
> + * must NOT run while holding us->dev_mutex: the reset and suspend
> + * callbacks acquire us->dev_mutex (via usb_stor_pre_reset() /
> + * usb_stor_suspend()) while the USB core holds the device lock, and a
> + * concurrent scan would then deadlock against them. The transfer now
> + * uses only private resources, so take the lock only to publish the
> + * result.
> + */
> if (us->protocol == USB_PR_BULK &&
> !(us->fflags & US_FL_SINGLE_LUN) &&
> !(us->fflags & US_FL_SCM_MULT_TARG)) {
> + int max_lun = usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun(us);
> +
> mutex_lock(&us->dev_mutex);
> - us->max_lun = usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun(us);
> + us->max_lun = max_lun;
[Severity: High]
Does running usb_stor_Bulk_max_lun() outside us->dev_mutex allow a
GET_MAX_LUN control transfer to run concurrently with port resets, PM
suspend, or active SCSI commands?
usb_stor_pre_reset() and usb_stor_suspend() lock us->dev_mutex specifically
to ensure no URBs are in flight or submitted during a USB reset or suspend:
drivers/usb/storage/usb.c:usb_stor_pre_reset() {
/* Make sure no command runs during the reset */
mutex_lock(&us->dev_mutex);
return 0;
}
Also, because scsi_add_host() has already been called in usb_stor_probe2(),
usb_stor_control_thread() can acquire us->dev_mutex while GET_MAX_LUN is
still in flight, check srb->device->lun > us->max_lun against the stale 0
value, and issue bulk transfers or resets concurrently with GET_MAX_LUN.
Note as well that neither usb_stor_control_msg() nor usb_control_msg()
takes udev->dev.mutex.
> /*
> * Allow proper scanning of devices that present more than 8 LUNs
> * While not affecting other devices that may need the previous
> * behavior
> */
> - if (us->max_lun >= 8)
> - us_to_host(us)->max_lun = us->max_lun+1;
> + if (max_lun >= 8)
> + us_to_host(us)->max_lun = max_lun + 1;
> mutex_unlock(&us->dev_mutex);
> }
> scsi_scan_host(us_to_host(us));
[Severity: High]
This problem wasn't introduced by this patch, but can usb_stor_scan_dwork()
proceed to scsi_scan_host() on a disconnecting or failed device and stall
the USB hub workqueue [1]?
In subdrivers such as ene_ub6250_probe(), usb_stor_probe2() schedules
scan_dwork before hardware initialization completes, and on failure the
probe path calls usb_stor_disconnect():
CPU0 (probe thread) CPU1 (scan_dwork)
------------------- -----------------
ene_ub6250_probe()
usb_stor_probe2()
schedule_delayed_work(&us->scan_dwork, ...)
usb_stor_scan_dwork()
mutex_lock(&us->dev_mutex)
mutex_lock(&us->dev_mutex)
ene_get_card_type() (fails)
mutex_unlock(&us->dev_mutex)
...
mutex_unlock(&us->dev_mutex)
usb_stor_disconnect() scsi_scan_host() <-- stalls on dead dev
quiesce_and_remove_host()
cancel_delayed_work_sync()
Because quiesce_and_remove_host() waits in cancel_delayed_work_sync()
before setting US_FLIDX_DISCONNECTING, scsi_scan_host() issues SCSI
commands that time out against the unresponsive device, blocking the USB
hub thread for over 90 seconds.
[1] https://sashiko.dev/#/bug/linux-0529026a-086b-4e39-8ee0-4a1314c92146
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/tencent_7682CAFD52BA8845497EA2C9047754EC6605@qq.com?part=1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-11-08 23:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-11-08 23:33 [PATCH] usb: storage: don't hold dev_mutex across the max_lun control transfer Shuai Liu
2026-11-08 23:45 ` sashiko-bot
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox