On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 12:43:02PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> The recent patch to fix the afs_server struct leak didn't actually fix the
> bug, but rather fixed some of the symptoms. The problem is that an
> asynchronous call that holds a resource pointed to by call->reply[0] will
> find the pointer cleared in the call destructor, thereby preventing the
> resource from being cleaned up.
>
> In the case of the server record leak, the afs_fs_get_capabilities()
> function in devel code sets up a call with reply[0] pointing at the server
> record that should be altered when the result is obtained, but this was
> being cleared before the destructor was called, so the put in the
> destructor does nothing and the record is leaked.
>
> Commit f014ffb025c1 removed the additional ref obtained by
> afs_install_server(), but the removal of this ref is actually used by the
> garbage collector to mark a server record as being defunct after the record
> has expired through lack of use.
>
> The offending clearance of call->reply[0] upon completion in
> afs_process_async_call() has been there from the origin of the code, but
> none of the asynchronous calls actually use that pointer currently, so it
> should be safe to remove (note that synchronous calls don't involve this
> function).
>
> Fix this by the following means:
>
> (1) Revert commit f014ffb025c1.
>
> (2) Remove the clearance of reply[0] from afs_process_async_call().
>
> Without this, afs_manage_servers() will suffer an assertion failure if it
> sees a server record that didn't get used because the usage count is not 1.
>
> Fixes: f014ffb025c1 ("afs: Fix afs_server struct leak")
> Fixes: 08e0e7c82eea ("[AF_RXRPC]: Make the in-kernel AFS filesystem use AF_RXRPC.")
> Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
Now applied, thanks.
greg k-h
