Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] memory: Fix double unref of flatview

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 12/02/2015 20:32, Matthew Rosato wrote:
> Could it be that the order in which flatview_unref (and therefore
> memory_region_unref) vs object_unparent(mr) matters (ie, object_unparent
> should always happen last)?  Prior to RCUification, seems like the
> old_view was always unreferenced prior to return from
> memory_region_del_subregion (so, memory_region_unref always occurred
> before the object_unparent(mr)).  Now, the two could happen in either
> order -- and looking at memory_region_unref, it is specifically looking
> at the existence of obj->parent.

I think you're right.

To test your theory, you could try using call_rcu to unparent the memory
region.  The complete fix would be to wrap the MemoryRegion within a
container device, and do object_unparent on the container device.  Then
the following happens:

1) the container object's unparent method calls memory_region_del_subregion

2) when the old flatview is destroyed, it calls memory_region_unref but
the parent is still in place

3) the container object is destroyed

4) the container object destroys the container device.

Note that these rules apply only to actual memory regions (I/O or RAM),
not aliases or containers.  I hope to post a doc patch next week, since
I'm completing the patches that fix the only other problematic case
(PCIe MMCONFIG).  I was not expecting this to trigger so early, which is
why I had left this for part 3.

Paolo