Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.33 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.33;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230919081958.7071-1-qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>
 <ZQndj34e9lOpA8Fm@slm.duckdns.org> <ZQnd9CVWecNqHo5V@slm.duckdns.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZQnd9CVWecNqHo5V@slm.duckdns.org>
From:   Z qiang <qiang.zhang1211@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Sep 2023 13:00:35 +0800
Message-ID: <CALm+0cWVTk9fJpvurej-k71mS640GorwkWfwgVdRpeikd9VUDw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] workqueue: Fix UAF report by KASAN in pwq_release_workfn()
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
Cc:     jiangshanlai@gmail.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 07:42:39AM -1000, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > The patch looks fine but
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 04:19:58PM +0800, Zqiang wrote:
> > > @@ -4743,6 +4743,8 @@ struct workqueue_struct *alloc_workqueue(const char *fmt,
> > >     wq_free_lockdep(wq);
> > >  err_free_wq:
> > >     free_workqueue_attrs(wq->unbound_attrs);
> >
> > Can you please add a comment here explaining why the flushing is necessary?
> >
> > > +   if (wq->flags & WQ_UNBOUND)
> > > +           kthread_flush_worker(pwq_release_worker);
>
> Hmm... also, wouldn't it be clearer to flush from alloc_and_link_pwqs()
> right after apply_workqueue_attrs() failed? That's the only case that
> requires flushing, right?
>

Yes, thanks,  I will resend :)

Thanks
Zqiang

>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> tejun