Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:8 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:8;
Date:   Sat, 7 Oct 2023 17:10:21 +0200
From:   Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To:     Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@gmail.com>
Cc:     jreuter@yaina.de, ralf@linux-mips.org, davem@davemloft.net,
        edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
        linux-hams@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] ax25: Fix potential deadlock on &ax25_list_lock
Message-ID: <20231007151021.GC831234@kernel.org>
References: <20231005072349.52602-1-dg573847474@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231005072349.52602-1-dg573847474@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 05, 2023 at 07:23:49AM +0000, Chengfeng Ye wrote:
> Timer interrupt ax25_ds_timeout() could introduce double locks on
> &ax25_list_lock.
> 
> ax25_ioctl()
> --> ax25_ctl_ioctl()
> --> ax25_dama_off()
> --> ax25_dev_dama_off()
> --> ax25_check_dama_slave()
> --> spin_lock(&ax25_list_lock)
> <timer interrupt>
>    --> ax25_ds_timeout()
>    --> spin_lock(&ax25_list_lock)
> 
> This flaw was found by an experimental static analysis tool I am
> developing for irq-related deadlock.
> 
> To prevent the potential deadlock, the patch use spin_lock_bh()
> on &ax25_list_lock inside ax25_check_dama_slave().
> 
> Fixes: c19c4b9c9acb ("[AX.25]: Optimize AX.25 socket list lock")
> Signed-off-by: Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@gmail.com>

Hi Chengfeng Ye,

Are there other functions that spin_lock(&ax25_list_lock)
that also need to use spin_lock_bh()?

...