From: Mirsad Todorovac <mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr>
To: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Scott Branden <sbranden@broadcom.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Russ Weight <russell.h.weight@intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Tianfei zhang <tianfei.zhang@intel.com>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
Zhengchao Shao <shaozhengchao@huawei.com>,
Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>,
Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v4 1/1] test_firmware: fix some memory leaks and racing conditions
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 08:16:17 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e9af482f-5b8a-70c0-d767-e98703cd1b03@alu.unizg.hr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZEgbkoSjHcVLcCcp@bombadil.infradead.org>
On 25.4.2023. 20:27, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 08:52:06PM +0200, Mirsad Goran Todorovac wrote:
>> Some functions were called both from locked and unlocked context, so
>> the lock was dropped prematurely, introducing a race condition when
>> deadlock was avoided.
>>
>> Having two locks wouldn't assure a race-proof mutual exclusion.
>>
>> __test_dev_config_update_bool(), __test_dev_config_update_u8() and
>> __test_dev_config_update_size_t() unlocked versions of the functions
>> were introduced to be called from the locked contexts as a workaround
>> without releasing the main driver's lock and causing a race condition.
>>
>> This should guarantee mutual exclusion and prevent any race conditions.
>>
>> Locked versions simply allow for mutual exclusion and call the unlocked
>> counterparts, to avoid duplication of code.
>>
>> trigger_batched_requests_store() and trigger_batched_requests_async_store()
>> now return -EBUSY if called with test_fw_config->reqs already allocated,
>> so the memory leak is prevented.
>>
>> The same functions now keep track of the allocated buf for firmware in
>> req->fw_buf as release_firmware() will not deallocate this storage for us.
>>
>> Additionally, in __test_release_all_firmware(), req->fw_buf is released
>> before calling release_firmware(req->fw),
>> foreach test_fw_config->reqs[i], i = 0 .. test_fw_config->num_requests-1
>>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>> Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Russ Weight <russell.h.weight@intel.com>
>> Cc: Tianfei zhang <tianfei.zhang@intel.com>
>> Cc: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
>> Cc: Zhengchao Shao <shaozhengchao@huawei.com>
>> Cc: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>> Cc: Scott Branden <sbranden@broadcom.com>
>> Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org>
>> Suggested-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Mirsad Goran Todorovac <mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr>
>
> Mirad, thanks for this work, good stuff! So the patch just needs to be
> adjust with:
>
> Fixes: 7feebfa487b92 ("test_firmware: add support for request_firmware_into_buf"
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.4
>
> Then, can you split the patch in two, one which fixes the memory leaks
> and another that deals with the mutexes. The second patch might be a fix
> for the original code but I can't tell until I see the changes split out.
>
> The commit log should account for the memory leak and be clear how it
> happens. The other commit log for the second patch should clarify what
> it fixes and why as well.
It seems to me that there is something wrong with the patchwork, as this commit
had not yet appeared in 5.4 LTS stable tree?
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/log/?qt=grep&q=Mirsad&h=linux-5.4.y
I was accidentally looking whether it passed, and it seems like more than a month
since the other commits propagated :-/
Thanks,
Mirsad
--
Mirsad Todorovac
System engineer
Faculty of Graphic Arts | Academy of Fine Arts
University of Zagreb
Republic of Croatia, the European Union
Sistem inženjer
Grafički fakultet | Akademija likovnih umjetnosti
Sveučilište u Zagrebu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-27 6:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-21 18:52 Mirsad Goran Todorovac
2023-04-25 18:27 ` Luis Chamberlain
2023-07-27 6:16 ` Mirsad Todorovac [this message]
2023-07-27 15:36 ` Luis Chamberlain
2023-07-27 22:14 ` Mirsad Todorovac
2023-07-27 22:45 ` Luis Chamberlain
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=e9af482f-5b8a-70c0-d767-e98703cd1b03@alu.unizg.hr \
--to=mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr \
--cc=christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr \
--cc=colin.i.king@gmail.com \
--cc=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=russell.h.weight@intel.com \
--cc=sbranden@broadcom.com \
--cc=shaozhengchao@huawei.com \
--cc=tianfei.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=vincenzopalazzodev@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®