[PATCH v2] ubi: block: Fix cleanup handling
Zhihao Cheng
chengzhihao1 at huawei.com
Sat Jun 10 00:19:03 PDT 2023
在 2023/6/9 11:16, Zhihao Cheng 写道:
> 在 2023/6/7 17:25, Vincent Whitchurch 写道:
>> ubiblock's remove handling has a couple of problems:
>>
>> - It uses the gendisk after put_disk(), resulting in a use-after-free.
>>
>> - There is a circular locking dependency between disk->open_mutex (used
>> from del_gendisk() and blkdev_open()) and dev->dev_mutex (used from
>> ubiblock_open() and ubiblock_remove()).
>>
>> Fix these by implementing ->free_disk() and moving the final cleanup
>> there.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch at axis.com>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Combine and rework patches to implement and use ->free_disk().
>> - Link to v1:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230523-ubiblock-remove-v1-0-240bed75849b@axis.com
>>
>> ---
>> drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
>> index 3711d7f74600..570e660673ad 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
>> @@ -293,11 +293,23 @@ static int ubiblock_getgeo(struct block_device
>> *bdev, struct hd_geometry *geo)
>> return 0;
>> }
>> +static void ubiblock_free_disk(struct gendisk *disk)
>> +{
>> + struct ubiblock *dev = disk->private_data;
>> +
>> + mutex_lock(&devices_mutex);
>> + idr_remove(&ubiblock_minor_idr, disk->first_minor);
>> + mutex_unlock(&devices_mutex);
>> +
>> + kfree(dev);
>> +}
>> +
>> static const struct block_device_operations ubiblock_ops = {
>> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>> .open = ubiblock_open,
>> .release = ubiblock_release,
>> .getgeo = ubiblock_getgeo,
>> + .free_disk = ubiblock_free_disk,
>> };
>> static blk_status_t ubiblock_queue_rq(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx,
>> @@ -452,9 +464,8 @@ static void ubiblock_cleanup(struct ubiblock *dev)
>> del_gendisk(dev->gd);
>> /* Finally destroy the blk queue */
>> dev_info(disk_to_dev(dev->gd), "released");
>> - put_disk(dev->gd);
>> blk_mq_free_tag_set(&dev->tag_set);
>> - idr_remove(&ubiblock_minor_idr, dev->gd->first_minor);
>> + put_disk(dev->gd);
>
> I thought it's better to do put_disk() first then do
> blk_mq_free_tag_set(), likes nbd, loop does. Will
> put_disk->disk_release->blk_mq_exit_queue->blk_mq_exit_hw_queues access
> tag_set which has been freed by blk_mq_free_tag_set()?
>
All right, just ignore this comment. The nbd doesn't implement
'->free_disk'. The 'ubiblock' will be freed in '->free_disk' invoked
from put_disk, so 'blk_mq_free_tag_set(&dev->tag_set)' should be
executed before put_disk.
>> }
>> int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi)
>> @@ -478,11 +489,11 @@ int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi)
>> /* Remove from device list */
>> list_del(&dev->list);
>> - ubiblock_cleanup(dev);
>> mutex_unlock(&dev->dev_mutex);
>> mutex_unlock(&devices_mutex);
>> - kfree(dev);
>> + ubiblock_cleanup(dev);
>> +
>> return 0;
>> out_unlock_dev:
>> @@ -623,17 +634,19 @@ static void ubiblock_remove_all(void)
>> {
>> struct ubiblock *next;
>> struct ubiblock *dev;
>> + LIST_HEAD(list);
>> mutex_lock(&devices_mutex);
>> - list_for_each_entry_safe(dev, next, &ubiblock_devices, list) {
>> + list_splice_init(&ubiblock_devices, &list);
>> + mutex_unlock(&devices_mutex);
>> +
>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(dev, next, &list, list) {
>> /* The module is being forcefully removed */
>> WARN_ON(dev->desc);
>> /* Remove from device list */
>> list_del(&dev->list);
>> ubiblock_cleanup(dev);
>> - kfree(dev);
>> }
>> - mutex_unlock(&devices_mutex);
>> }
>> int __init ubiblock_init(void)
>>
>> ---
>> base-commit: 44c026a73be8038f03dbdeef028b642880cf1511
>> change-id: 20230523-ubiblock-remove-eab61cf683f0
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Linux MTD discussion mailing list
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd/
More information about the linux-mtd
mailing list