From: Benjamin Block <bblock@linux.ibm.com>
To: "Ionut Nechita (Wind River)" <ionut.nechita@windriver.com>
Cc: schnelle@linux.ibm.com, alifm@linux.ibm.com, bhelgaas@google.com,
dtatulea@nvidia.com, helgaas@kernel.org,
intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, ionut_n2001@yahoo.com,
julianr@linux.ibm.com, kbusch@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
linux@roeck-us.net, lkml@mageta.org, lukas@wunner.de,
mani@kernel.org, matthew.brost@intel.com,
michal.wajdeczko@intel.com, piotr.piorkowski@intel.com,
sebott@linux.ibm.com, stable@vger.kernel.org,
sunlightlinux@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/2] PCI/IOV: Fix SR-IOV locking races and AB-BA deadlock
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2026 18:07:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260324170710.GA252856@p1gen4-pw042f0m> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260319202755.16081-1-ionut.nechita@windriver.com>
On Thu, Mar 19, 2026 at 10:27:55PM +0200, Ionut Nechita (Wind River) wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2026 13:31:39 +0100, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> > For your awareness, I saw that this series has some findings on
> > Google's new Sashiko AI reviewing tool[0]. At a quick glance the
> > findings seem like at least reasonable concerns to me. I'm still
> > looking at this independently also of course.
>
--8<--
> 3) TOCTOU Race Condition / Lock Window Vulnerability
> — a driver can rebind between device_release_driver() and
> pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device_locked()
>
> This is theoretically valid but practically impossible. The
> window is a few instructions wide. For this race to trigger:
>
> a) device_remove_file_self() has already removed the "remove"
> sysfs attribute, signaling the device is being torn down
> b) a bind_store or udev probe would need to fire in exactly
> that window
> c) the newly bound driver's probe() would need to call
> pci_enable_sriov() and block on pci_rescan_remove_lock
>
> This is the same pattern used elsewhere in the kernel (e.g.,
> the existing remove_store already had no synchronization between
> device_remove_file_self() and pci_stop_and_remove_bus_device_locked()
> — the patch just adds one more call in between).
>
> If this is a real concern, it would need to be addressed as a
> separate improvement, not as a blocker for this fix.
I haven't had time to fully review all this yet, but one quick comment: after
the first idea to unbind the device driver I also realized we could have a
race here between unbinding, and then possibly re-binding. We could probably
prevent that by marking the device as dead:
+ if (val && device_remove_file_self(dev, attr)) {
+ device_lock(dev);
+ kill_device(dev);
+ device_unlock(dev);
This doesn't modify the reference count or anything, but only sets the private
member of the `struct device` `dead` to true. This can't be undone using the
device core's public API, and once set, a device can not be bound to a new
device-driver.
This should prevent any such race AFAICS. The unbind is protected by the
device-mutex, so once the flag is set, and the unbind is done, this device
will stay unbound.
It's not really "pretty" though.
--
Best Regards, Benjamin Block / Linux on IBM Z Kernel Development
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / https://www.ibm.com/privacy
Vors. Aufs.-R.: Wolfgang Wendt / Geschäftsführung: David Faller
Sitz der Ges.: Ehningen / Registergericht: AmtsG Stuttgart, HRB 243294
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-24 17:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-18 21:03 [PATCH v10 0/2] PCI/IOV: Fix SR-IOV locking races and AB-BA deadlock Ionut Nechita (Wind River)
2026-03-18 21:03 ` [PATCH v10 1/2] PCI/IOV: Make pci_lock_rescan_remove() reentrant and protect sriov_add_vfs/sriov_del_vfs Ionut Nechita (Wind River)
2026-03-18 21:03 ` [PATCH v10 2/2] PCI: Fix AB-BA deadlock between device_lock and pci_rescan_remove_lock in remove_store Ionut Nechita (Wind River)
2026-03-19 12:31 ` [PATCH v10 0/2] PCI/IOV: Fix SR-IOV locking races and AB-BA deadlock Niklas Schnelle
2026-03-19 19:25 ` Guenter Roeck
2026-03-19 20:27 ` Ionut Nechita (Wind River)
2026-03-24 17:07 ` Benjamin Block [this message]
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=20260324170710.GA252856@p1gen4-pw042f0m \
--to=bblock@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=dtatulea@nvidia.com \
--cc=helgaas@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=ionut.nechita@windriver.com \
--cc=ionut_n2001@yahoo.com \
--cc=julianr@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=lkml@mageta.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=mani@kernel.org \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=michal.wajdeczko@intel.com \
--cc=piotr.piorkowski@intel.com \
--cc=schnelle@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=sebott@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sunlightlinux@gmail.com \
/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