linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>,
	Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: drop ancient protection against sysfs refcounting issues
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 10:17:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150120101752.GI26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150120071256.GA18983@kroah.com>

On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 03:12:56PM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 08:05:20AM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> > On 01/20/2015 02:41 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > >On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 11:04:27PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > >>On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 03:01:42AM +0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > >>>On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 07:55:56PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > >>>>diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
> > >>>>index 39d25a8cb1ad..15cc5902cf89 100644
> > >>>>--- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
> > >>>>+++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
> > >>>>@@ -41,7 +41,6 @@
> > >>>>  #include <linux/of_device.h>
> > >>>>  #include <linux/of_irq.h>
> > >>>>  #include <linux/clk/clk-conf.h>
> > >>>>-#include <linux/completion.h>
> > >>>>  #include <linux/hardirq.h>
> > >>>>  #include <linux/irqflags.h>
> > >>>>  #include <linux/rwsem.h>
> > >>>>@@ -1184,8 +1183,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(i2c_new_dummy);
> > >>>>
> > >>>>  static void i2c_adapter_dev_release(struct device *dev)
> > >>>>  {
> > >>>>-	struct i2c_adapter *adap = to_i2c_adapter(dev);
> > >>>>-	complete(&adap->dev_released);
> > >>>>+	/* empty, but the driver core insists we need a release function */
> > >>>
> > >>>Yeah, it does, but I hate to see this in "real" code as something is
> > >>>probably wrong with it if it happens.
> > >>>
> > >>>Please move the rest of 'i2c_del_adapter' into the release function
> > >>>(what was after the wait_for_completion() call), and then all should be
> > >>>fine.
> > >>
> > >>Are you sure about that?  Some drivers do this, eg,
> > >>
> > >>         i2c_del_adapter(&drv_data->adapter);
> > >>         free_irq(drv_data->irq, drv_data);
> > >>
> > >>where drv_data was allocated using devm_kzalloc(), and so will be
> > >>released when the ->remove callback (which calls the above
> > >>i2c_del_adapter()) returns... freeing the embedded device struct.
> > >
> > >But that will fail today if the memory is freed in i2c_del_adapter(), so
> > >there shouldn't be any change in logic here.
> > >
> > >Or am I missing something obvious?
> > 
> > The memory is not freed in i2c_del_adapter().
> 
> Right, and I'm not saying it should be, just move the existing logic
> into the release callback, and the code flow should be the same and we
> don't end up with an "empty" release callback.

IMHO there are two possibilities here:

1. leave it as-is, where we ensure that the remainder of i2c_del_adapter
   does not complete until the release callback has been called.

2. fix it properly by taking (eg) the netdev approach to i2c_adapter,
   or an alternative solution which results in decoupling the lifetime
   of the struct device from the i2c_adapter.

Either of these would be much better than removing the completion and
then moving a chunk of code to make it "look" safer than it actually is
and thereby introducing potential use-after-free bugs.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-01-20 10:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-19 18:55 [PATCH] i2c: drop ancient protection against sysfs refcounting issues Wolfram Sang
2015-01-19 18:59 ` Pantelis Antoniou
2015-01-19 19:01 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-01-19 21:30   ` Wolfram Sang
2015-01-19 23:04   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-01-20  1:41     ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-01-20  7:05       ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-01-20  7:12         ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2015-01-20  7:27           ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2015-01-20 10:17           ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2015-01-20 11:35             ` Wolfram Sang
2015-01-19 19:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-01-19 19:39   ` Wolfram Sang
2015-01-19 20:01 ` Lars-Peter Clausen

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=20150120101752.GI26493@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=jdelvare@suse.de \
    --cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
    --cc=lars@metafoo.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
    /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).