From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
To: Chanho Min <chanho0207@gmail.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] remove the queue unlock in scsi_requset_fn
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 11:56:48 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <502F8300.2060307@acm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <502CA6C3.4040903@acm.org>
On 08/16/12 07:52, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 08/16/12 01:35, Chanho Min wrote:
>>> functions will occur in line. I also don't see why the sdev reference
>>> couldn't drop to zero here.
>> scsi_request_fn is called under the lock of request_queue->queue_lock.
>> If we drop the sdev reference to zero here,
>> scsi_device_dev_release_usercontext is
>> invoked and make request_queue to NULL. When caller of scsi_request_fn try to
>> unlock request_queue->queue_lock, the oops is occurred.
>
> Whether or not your patch is applied, if the put_device() call in
> scsi_request_fn() decreases the sdev reference count to zero, the
> scsi_request_fn() caller will still try to unlock the queue lock after
> scsi_request_fn() finished and hence will trigger a use-after-free. I'm
> afraid the only real solution is to modify the SCSI and/or block layers
> such that scsi_remove_device() can't finish while scsi_request_fn() is
> in progress. And once that is guaranteed the get_device() / put_device()
> pair can be left out from scsi_request_fn().
(replying to my own e-mail)
How about the patch below ?
[PATCH] Fix device removal race
If the put_device() call in scsi_request_fn() drops the sdev refcount
to zero then the spin_lock_irq() call after the put_device() call
triggers a use-after-free. Avoid that by making sure that blk_cleanup_queue()
can only finish after all active scsi_request_fn() calls have returned.
---
block/blk-core.c | 1 +
drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c | 10 ++--------
include/linux/blkdev.h | 5 +++++
3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
index 4b4dbdf..0e4da3b 100644
--- a/block/blk-core.c
+++ b/block/blk-core.c
@@ -388,6 +388,7 @@ void blk_drain_queue(struct request_queue *q, bool drain_all)
__blk_run_queue(q);
drain |= q->nr_rqs_elvpriv;
+ drain |= q->request_fn_active;
/*
* Unfortunately, requests are queued at and tracked from
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
index ffd7773..10bb348 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
@@ -1514,9 +1514,7 @@ static void scsi_request_fn(struct request_queue *q)
struct scsi_cmnd *cmd;
struct request *req;
- if(!get_device(&sdev->sdev_gendev))
- /* We must be tearing the block queue down already */
- return;
+ q->request_fn_active++;
/*
* To start with, we keep looping until the queue is empty, or until
@@ -1626,11 +1624,7 @@ out_delay:
if (sdev->device_busy == 0)
blk_delay_queue(q, SCSI_QUEUE_DELAY);
out:
- /* must be careful here...if we trigger the ->remove() function
- * we cannot be holding the q lock */
- spin_unlock_irq(q->queue_lock);
- put_device(&sdev->sdev_gendev);
- spin_lock_irq(q->queue_lock);
+ q->request_fn_active--;
}
u64 scsi_calculate_bounce_limit(struct Scsi_Host *shost)
diff --git a/include/linux/blkdev.h b/include/linux/blkdev.h
index 4e72a9d..11c1987 100644
--- a/include/linux/blkdev.h
+++ b/include/linux/blkdev.h
@@ -377,6 +377,11 @@ struct request_queue {
unsigned int nr_sorted;
unsigned int in_flight[2];
+ /*
+ * Number of active request_fn() calls for those request_fn()
+ * implementations that unlock the queue_lock, e.g. scsi_request_fn().
+ */
+ unsigned int request_fn_active;
unsigned int rq_timeout;
struct timer_list timeout;
--
1.7.7
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-18 11:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-10 3:22 [PATCH][SCSI] remove the queue unlock in scsi_requset_fn Chanho Min
2012-08-13 17:47 ` Bart Van Assche
2012-08-14 9:48 ` [PATCH RESEND] " Chanho Min
2012-08-14 12:07 ` James Bottomley
2012-08-16 1:35 ` Chanho Min
2012-08-16 7:52 ` Bart Van Assche
2012-08-16 8:10 ` James Bottomley
2012-08-18 11:56 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2012-08-16 7:56 ` James Bottomley
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=502F8300.2060307@acm.org \
--to=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=chanho0207@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=michaelc@cs.wisc.edu \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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).