On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 04:10:18PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 11:21:03AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 10:47 AM Heikki Krogerus
> > <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Greg,
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 08:11:54AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/lib/kobject.c b/lib/kobject.c
> > > > > index 83198cb37d8d..5921e2470b46 100644
> > > > > --- a/lib/kobject.c
> > > > > +++ b/lib/kobject.c
> > > > > @@ -663,6 +663,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(kobject_get_unless_zero);
> > > > > */
> > > > > static void kobject_cleanup(struct kobject *kobj)
> > > > > {
> > > > > + struct kobject *parent = kobj->parent;
> > > > > struct kobj_type *t = get_ktype(kobj);
> > > > > const char *name = kobj->name;
> > > > >
> > > > > @@ -680,6 +681,9 @@ static void kobject_cleanup(struct kobject *kobj)
> > > > > kobject_uevent(kobj, KOBJ_REMOVE);
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > + /* make sure the parent is not released before the (last) child */
> > > > > + kobject_get(parent);
> > > > > +
> > > > > /* remove from sysfs if the caller did not do it */
> > > > > if (kobj->state_in_sysfs) {
> > > > > pr_debug("kobject: '%s' (%p): auto cleanup kobject_del\n",
> > > > > @@ -693,6 +697,8 @@ static void kobject_cleanup(struct kobject *kobj)
> > > > > t->release(kobj);
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > + kobject_put(parent);
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > > No, please don't do this.
> > > >
> > > > A child device should have always incremented the parent already if it
> > > > was correctly registered. We have had this patch been proposed multiple
> > > > times over the years, and every time it was, we said no and went and
> > > > fixed the real issue which was with the user of the interface.
> > >
> > > The parent ref count is incremented by the child, that is not the
> > > problem. The problem is that when that child is released, if it's the
> > > last child of the parent, and there are no other users for the parent,
> > > then the parent is actually released _before_ the child. And that
> > > happens in the above function kobject_cleanup().
> >
> > In fact, it happens in kobject_del() invoked by kobject_cleanup() AFAICS.
> >
> > So it appears incorrect to use kobject_del() as is in the latter.
> >
> > > We can work around the problem by taking a reference to the parent
> > > separately, but we have to do that everywhere separately (which I
> > > guess is exactly what has been done so far). That workaroud still does
> > > not really fix the core problem. The core problem is still that
> > > lib/kboject.c is allowing the parent kobject to be released before the
> > > child kobject, and that quite simply should not be allowed to happen.
> > >
> > > I don't have a problem if you want to have a better solution for this,
> > > but the solution really can't anymore be that we are always expected
> > > to separately increment the parent's ref count with every type of
> > > kobject.
> >
> > An alternative might be to define something like __kobject_del() doing
> > everything that kobject_del() does *without* the
> > kobject_put(kobj->parent).
> >
> > Then, kobject_del() could be defined as something like (pseudocode):
> >
> > kobject_del(kobj)
> > {
> > kobject *perent = kobj->parent;
> >
> > __kobject_del(kobj);
> > kobject_put(parent);
> > }
> >
> > and kobject_cleanup() could call __kobject_del() instead of
> > kobject_del() and then do the last kobject_put(parent) when it is done
> > with the child.
> >
> > Would that work?
>
> I think so. Greg, what do you think?
Hm, maybe. Can someone test it out with the reproducer?
thanks,
greg k-h
