On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Virtio wants to release used indices after the corresponding
> virtio device has been unregistered. However, virtio does not
> hold an extra reference, giving up its last reference with
> device_unregister(), making accessing dev->index afterwards
> invalid.
>
> I actually saw problems when testing my (not-yet-merged)
> virtio-ccw code:
>
> - device_add virtio-net,id=xxx
> -> creates device virtio<n> with n>0
>
> - device_del xxx
> -> deletes virtio<n>, but calls ida_simple_remove with an
> index of 0
>
> - device_add virtio-net,id=xxx
> -> tries to add virtio0, which is still in use...
>
> So let's save the index we want to release before calling
> device_unregister().
>
> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/virtio/virtio.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> index 1e8659c..809b0de 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio.c
> @@ -225,8 +225,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(register_virtio_device);
>
> void unregister_virtio_device(struct virtio_device *dev)
> {
> + int index = dev->index; /* save for after device release */
> +
> device_unregister(&dev->dev);
> - ida_simple_remove(&virtio_index_ida, dev->index);
> + ida_simple_remove(&virtio_index_ida, index);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(unregister_virtio_device);
Acked-by: Sjur Brændeland <sjur.brandeland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Great minds think alike! I discovered issues with this implementation
a while back and Michael suggested an identical patch:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/4/173
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/9/7/105
The issue I ran into was that when virtio devices are created by remoteproc
the device memory might be freed when calling device_unregister(), and
the value of dev->index is then undefined. So this bug bites when
unregistering a Virtio devices from remoteproc with CONFIG_DEBUG_SLAB
enabled. However this bug is not triggered by virtio_pci as it implements a
non-standard device release-function that does not free the device memory.
Thanks,
Sjur
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
