Re: [PATCH] scsi: target: tcm_fc: use kref_get_unless_zero() in ft_sess_get()
[email protected] Tue, 04 Aug 2026 21:52:24 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.scsi |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(= s) to consider: Pre-existing issues: - [High] Use-after-free in ft_sess_delete_all() due to unsafe RCU list iter= ation while blocking -- --- Patch [1]: [PATCH] scsi: target: tcm_fc: use kref_get_unless_zero() in = ft_sess_get() --- commit 7c29402c5a3237eba08c6ba5beba9b0842deb5e7 Author: Yifei Gao <[email protected]> scsi: target: tcm_fc: use kref_get_unless_zero() in ft_sess_get() ft_sess_get() walks the RCU-protected session hash under rcu_read_lock() and takes a plain kref_get() on a matching session. Session teardown does hlist_del_rcu() and then drops ft_lport_lock before the final ft_sess_put() -> kfree_rcu(). A reader that is preempted between the port_id comparison and the kref_get() can therefore revive a session whose refcount has already dropped to zero and is pending free, leading to a use-after-free and a double target_remove_session(). > diff --git a/drivers/target/tcm_fc/tfc_sess.c b/drivers/target/tcm_fc/tfc= _sess.c > index 797be06ab71b8..1bc7d2dcbea36 100644 > --- a/drivers/target/tcm_fc/tfc_sess.c > +++ b/drivers/target/tcm_fc/tfc_sess.c > @@ -172,7 +172,8 @@ static struct ft_sess *ft_sess_get(struct fc_lport *l= port, u32 port_id) > head =3D &tport->hash[ft_sess_hash(port_id)]; > hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(sess, head, hash) { > if (sess->port_id =3D=3D port_id) { > - kref_get(&sess->kref); > + if (!kref_get_unless_zero(&sess->kref)) > + break; > rcu_read_unlock(); > TFC_SESS_DBG(lport, "port_id %x found %p\n", > port_id, sess); [Severity: High] This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but while reviewing the use of RCU list iteration in this file, I noticed a pre-existing issue in ft_sess_delete_all(). During port teardown, the code iterates over the session hash table: drivers/target/tcm_fc/tfc_sess.c:ft_sess_delete_all() { ... hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(sess, head, hash) { ft_sess_unhash(sess); ft_close_sess(sess); /* release from table */ } ... } The iteration uses hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(), but ft_close_sess() calls target_wait_for_sess_cmds() which blocks, and then drops the final table reference triggering kfree_rcu(sess). Because the thread sleeps, an RCU grace period can easily expire before the loop macro evaluates the next element (sess->hash.next), resulting in a read of freed memory. Does this loop need to use a safe iterator that doesn't rely on RCU while blocking, or restart the iteration after closing a session? --=20 Sashiko AI review =C2=B7 https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260804213703.3411= [email protected]?part=3D1