Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Saubhik Mukherjee <saubhik.mukherjee@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tty: serial: owl: Fix data race in owl_uart_remove
To:     Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, jirislaby@kernel.org,
        linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        ldv-project@linuxtesting.org, andrianov@ispras.ru
References: <20210617110443.6526-1-saubhik.mukherjee@gmail.com>
 <YMswdqNpjb9n1pdW@kroah.com> <ceebf511-9971-6deb-a6dd-458d69de2bbd@gmail.com>
 <YNLfxMZZ0a80qKLg@hovoldconsulting.com>
Message-ID: <a9d43126-acd7-efb0-bf1a-86b06965f0e2@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Jun 2021 17:37:38 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <YNLfxMZZ0a80qKLg@hovoldconsulting.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 6/23/21 12:46 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 11:06:53AM +0530, Saubhik Mukherjee wrote:
>> On 6/17/21 4:52 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2021 at 04:34:43PM +0530, Saubhik Mukherjee wrote:
>>>> Suppose the driver is registered and a UART port is added. Once an
>>>> application opens the port, owl_uart_startup is called which registers
>>>> the interrupt handler owl_uart_irq.
>>>>
>>>> We could have the following race condition:
>>>>
>>>> When device is removed, owl_uart_remove is called, which calls
>>>> uart_remove_one_port, which calls owl_uart_release_port, which writes
>>>> NULL to port->membase. At this point parallely, an interrupt could be
>>>> handled by owl_uart_irq which reads port->membase.
>>>>
>>>> This is because it is possible to remove device without closing a port.
>>>> Thus, we need to check it and call owl_uart_shutdown in owl_uart_remove.
> 
> No, this makes no sense at all. The port is deregistered and hung up by
> uart_remove_one_port() (and the interrupt line is consequently disabled
> by the driver) before it is released so this can never happen.

Thanks for the reply. I am not sure I understand. I could not find any 
interrupt disabling in owl_uart_remove. Could you point out where/how is 
the interrupt line is disabled before releasing the port?

A related question question was asked in 
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-serial/YMcpBXd1vtipueQi@kroah.com/.

>>>> Found by Linux Driver Verification project (linuxtesting.org).
> 
> And you clearly did not test this, which you should mention.

This race warning was found by a static analysis tool. The code changes 
are untested.