lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [BUG] xen: Two possible sleep-in-atomic-context bugs in bind_evtchn_to_irqhandler()
From
Date
On 20/06/18 04:49, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
> The driver may sleep with holding a spinlock.
> The function call paths (from bottom to top) in Linux-4.16.7 are:
>
> [FUNC] mutex_lock_nested --> can sleep
> drivers/xen/events/events_base.c, 839: mutex_lock_nested in
> bind_evtchn_to_irq
> drivers/xen/events/events_base.c, 1030: bind_evtchn_to_irq in
> bind_evtchn_to_irqhandler
> drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c, 371: bind_evtchn_to_irqhandler in
> create_active
> drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c, 417: create_active in pvcalls_front_connect
> drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c, 410: spin_lock in pvcalls_front_connect
>
> [FUNC] request_irq --> can sleep
> drivers/xen/events/events_base.c, 1003: request_irq in
> bind_evtchn_to_irqhandler
> drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c, 371: bind_evtchn_to_irqhandler in
> create_active
> drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c, 417: create_active in pvcalls_front_connect
> drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c, 410: spin_lock in pvcalls_front_connect
>
> These bugs are found by my static analysis tool (DSAC-2) and checked by my
> code review.
>
> I do not know how to correctly fix these bugs, so I just report them.
> Maybe create_active() should not be called with holding a spinlock.

Right, I think calling create_active() should be done before taking the
lock. Stefano, what do you think?


Juergen

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-20 11:14    [W:0.035 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site