On Fri, 2023-07-07 at 12:43 +0200, Niklas Schnelle wrote:
> The clients array references all registered clients and is protected by
> the clients_lock. Besides its use as general list of clients the clients
> array is accessed in ism_handle_irq() to forward ISM device events to
> clients.
>
> While the clients_lock is taken in the IRQ handler when calling
> handle_event() it is however incorrectly not held during the
> client->handle_irq() call and for the preceding clients[] access leaving
> it unprotected against concurrent client (un-)registration.
>
> Furthermore the accesses to ism->sba_client_arr[] in ism_register_dmb()
> and ism_unregister_dmb() are not protected by any lock. This is
> especially problematic as the client ID from the ism->sba_client_arr[]
> is not checked against NO_CLIENT and neither is the client pointer
> checked.
>
> Instead of expanding the use of the clients_lock further add a separate
> array in struct ism_dev which references clients subscribed to the
> device's events and IRQs. This array is protected by ism->lock which is
> already taken in ism_handle_irq() and can be taken outside the IRQ
> handler when adding/removing subscribers or the accessing
> ism->sba_client_arr[]. This also means that the clients_lock is no
> longer taken in IRQ context.
>
> Fixes: 89e7d2ba61b7 ("net/ism: Add new API for client registration")
> Signed-off-by: Niklas Schnelle <schnelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
Sorry for the mess. My get_maintainers.pl to-cmd setup in git send-
email stumbled over the cover letter and so the cover letter was not
sent to the right people/lists messing up the "in-reply-to" references.
So I had to resend it.
Thanks
Niklas
