Re: [PATCH] bdi: Fix oops in wb_workfn()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 06:26:26PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> Syzbot has reported that it can hit a NULL pointer dereference in
> wb_workfn() due to wb->bdi->dev being NULL. This indicates that
> wb_workfn() was called for an already unregistered bdi which should not
> happen as wb_shutdown() called from bdi_unregister() should make sure
> all pending writeback works are completed before bdi is unregistered.
> Except that wb_workfn() itself can requeue the work with:
> 
> 	mod_delayed_work(bdi_wq, &wb->dwork, 0);
> 
> and if this happens while wb_shutdown() is waiting in:
> 
> 	flush_delayed_work(&wb->dwork);
> 
> the dwork can get executed after wb_shutdown() has finished and
> bdi_unregister() has cleared wb->bdi->dev.
> 
> Make wb_workfn() use wakeup_wb() for requeueing the work which takes all
> the necessary precautions against racing with bdi unregistration.
> 
> CC: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Fixes: 839a8e8660b6777e7fe4e80af1a048aebe2b5977
> Reported-by: syzbot <syzbot+9873874c735f2892e7e9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
> ---
>  fs/fs-writeback.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/fs/fs-writeback.c b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> index 47d7c151fcba..471d863958bc 100644
> --- a/fs/fs-writeback.c
> +++ b/fs/fs-writeback.c
> @@ -1961,7 +1961,7 @@ void wb_workfn(struct work_struct *work)
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!list_empty(&wb->work_list))
> -		mod_delayed_work(bdi_wq, &wb->dwork, 0);
> +		wb_wakeup(wb);
>  	else if (wb_has_dirty_io(wb) && dirty_writeback_interval)
>  		wb_wakeup_delayed(wb);

Yup, looks fine - I can't see any more of these open coded wakeup,
either, so we should be good here.

Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>

As an aside, why is half the wb infrastructure in fs/fs-writeback.c
and the other half in mm/backing-dev.c? it seems pretty random as to
what is where e.g. wb_wakeup() and wb_wakeup_delayed() are almost
identical, but are in completely different files...

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]

  Powered by Linux