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 iteration 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 *lport, u32 port_id)
> head = &tport->hash[ft_sess_hash(port_id)];
> hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(sess, head, hash) {
> if (sess->port_id == 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?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=1
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.