mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	dhowells@redhat.com, joel@jms.id.au, eajames@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	andrew@aj.id.au
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fsi:fsi-sbefifo: Fix possible concurrency use-after-free bugs in sbefifo_user_release
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2019 10:26:20 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <798fbb98-0cba-07f8-2165-180c63012e95@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0adee96b58a533bc8c5927039e96b5ed77c9bbad.camel@kernel.crashing.org>



On 2019/1/4 8:47, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-12-26 at 21:56 +0800, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
>> In drivers/fsi/fsi-sbefifo.c, the functions sbefifo_user_release(),
>> sbefifo_user_read() and sbefifo_user_write() may be concurrently executed.
> So after refreshing my mind, looking at the code and talking with Al, I
> really dont' see what race you are trying to fix here.
>
> read/write should never be concurrent with release for a given file and
> the stuff we are protecting here is local to the file instance.
>
> Do you have an actual problem you observed ?
>

Thanks for the reply.

In fact, this report is found by a static tool written by myself, 
instead of real execution.
My tool found that in some drivers, for the structure "struct 
file_operations", the code in intetrfaces ".read" , "write" and 
".release" are protected by the same lock.
The functions kcs_bmc_read(), kcs_bmc_write() and kcs_bmc_release() are 
examples.
Thus, my tool inferred that the intetrfaces ".read" , "write" and 
".release" of "struct file_operations" can be concurrently executed, and 
generated this report.
I manually checked this report, but I was not very sure of it, so I 
marked it as a "possible bug" and reported it.

 From your message, now I know my report is false, and ".read" , "write" 
cannot be concurrently executed with ".release" for a given file.
Sorry for my false report, and thanks for your message.


Best wishes,
Jia-Ju Bai

  reply	other threads:[~2019-01-04  2:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-12-26 13:56 Jia-Ju Bai
2019-01-02  9:34 ` David Howells
2019-01-03  3:27   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2019-01-03  4:26     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2019-01-04  0:47 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2019-01-04  2:26   ` Jia-Ju Bai [this message]
2019-01-04  3:26     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt

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=798fbb98-0cba-07f8-2165-180c63012e95@gmail.com \
    --to=baijiaju1990@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrew@aj.id.au \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
    --cc=eajames@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=joel@jms.id.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®