Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <8f6e7b28-e59d-96dd-1c46-bde3e3e56b54@alu.unizg.hr>
Date:   Fri, 28 Jul 2023 00:14:22 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.13.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v4 1/1] test_firmware: fix some memory leaks and
 racing conditions
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc:     Scott Branden <sbranden@broadcom.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Russ Weight <russell.h.weight@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Tianfei zhang <tianfei.zhang@intel.com>,
        Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
        Zhengchao Shao <shaozhengchao@huawei.com>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>,
        Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
References: <20230421185205.28743-1-mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr>
 <ZEgbkoSjHcVLcCcp@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <e9af482f-5b8a-70c0-d767-e98703cd1b03@alu.unizg.hr>
 <ZMKPCtftDQnfakId@bombadil.infradead.org>
From:   Mirsad Todorovac <mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr>
In-Reply-To: <ZMKPCtftDQnfakId@bombadil.infradead.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 7/27/23 17:36, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 08:16:17AM +0200, Mirsad Todorovac wrote:
>> On 25.4.2023. 20:27, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 08:52:06PM +0200, Mirsad Goran Todorovac wrote:
>>>> Some functions were called both from locked and unlocked context, so
>>>> the lock was dropped prematurely, introducing a race condition when
>>>> deadlock was avoided.
>>>>
>>>> Having two locks wouldn't assure a race-proof mutual exclusion.
>>>>
>>>> __test_dev_config_update_bool(), __test_dev_config_update_u8() and
>>>> __test_dev_config_update_size_t() unlocked versions of the functions
>>>> were introduced to be called from the locked contexts as a workaround
>>>> without releasing the main driver's lock and causing a race condition.
>>>>
>>>> This should guarantee mutual exclusion and prevent any race conditions.
>>>>
>>>> Locked versions simply allow for mutual exclusion and call the unlocked
>>>> counterparts, to avoid duplication of code.
>>>>
>>>> trigger_batched_requests_store() and trigger_batched_requests_async_store()
>>>> now return -EBUSY if called with test_fw_config->reqs already allocated,
>>>> so the memory leak is prevented.
>>>>
>>>> The same functions now keep track of the allocated buf for firmware in
>>>> req->fw_buf as release_firmware() will not deallocate this storage for us.
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, in __test_release_all_firmware(), req->fw_buf is released
>>>> before calling release_firmware(req->fw),
>>>> foreach test_fw_config->reqs[i], i = 0 .. test_fw_config->num_requests-1
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>>>> Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: Russ Weight <russell.h.weight@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Tianfei zhang <tianfei.zhang@intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
>>>> Cc: Zhengchao Shao <shaozhengchao@huawei.com>
>>>> Cc: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>>>> Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
>>>> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
>>>> Cc: Scott Branden <sbranden@broadcom.com>
>>>> Cc: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org>
>>>> Suggested-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Mirsad Goran Todorovac <mirsad.todorovac@alu.unizg.hr>
>>>
>>> Mirad, thanks for this work, good stuff! So the patch just needs to be
>>> adjust with:
>>>
>>> Fixes: 7feebfa487b92 ("test_firmware: add support for request_firmware_into_buf"
>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v5.4
>>>
>>> Then, can you split the patch in two, one which fixes the memory leaks
>>> and another that deals with the mutexes. The second patch might be a fix
>>> for the original code but I can't tell until I see the changes split out.
>>>
>>> The commit log should account for the memory leak and be clear how it
>>> happens. The other commit log for the second patch should clarify what
>>> it fixes and why as well.
>>
>> It seems to me that there is something wrong with the patchwork, as this commit
>> had not yet appeared in 5.4 LTS stable tree?
> 
> Did you resend a new v5 with the requested changes?

Actually, I am not sure what is the procedure, for it is accepted and visible in 5.10+ trees?

Mirsad