lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [BUG 3.12.rc4] Oops: unable to handle kernel paging request during shutdown
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:23:41AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>[+cc Veaceslav]
>
>On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman
><gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 09:13:29PM +0000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>>> .. and one more case of freeing a delayed work object (likely a kobject again):
>>>
>>> This time it looks like it's in the PCI layer, freeing the msi irq information.
>>>
>>> It looks like that code simply does
>>>
>>> kobject_del(&entry->kobj);
>>> kobject_put(&entry->kobj);
>>> list_del(&entry->list);
>>> kfree(entry);
>>>
>>> and the problem is that the "entry->kobj" may have *other* references
>>> to it, thanks to people accessing it through /sys, so despite doing a
>>> kojbect_del/kobject_put(), it's not at all ok to then do a "kfree()"
>>> on it. The embedded kobj might still be in use.
>>>
>>> Afaik, that code should do the kfree() on the kobject in the _release_
>>> method, not synchronously like that.
>>>
>>> We already have a msi_kobj_release(), I'm wondering why that doesn't
>>> do the kfree().
>>>
>>> Bjorn? Yinghai? Greg, comments about that msi kobj usage?
>>
>> Ick, it really should be doing a kfree() in the release only. Bjorn has
>> had a bunch of changes in this area recently, perhaps they are in
>> linux-next waiting for 3.13, and I've talked to him about getting rid of
>> all of the kobjects for msi files, as I don't think it's needed at all.
>
>IIRC, you said you might take a look at converting this to attributes
>on the train back home, so I haven't looked into it myself :)
>
>> Bjorn, don't you have a fix for this problem already done somewhere?
>
>Yep, this is clearly wrong, and Veaceslav has a patch that moves the
>kfree() to the release function. I've been waiting for a consolidated
>repost of all his MSI-related fixes, but maybe he's been waiting for
>*me*.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/9/170

My patchset is ready to be applied, in its v2 state.

Except that the bits with kobject_del() (theoretical race) - which are done
in your patch "kobject: remove kset from sysfs immediately in
kset_unregister()", though I didn't see it accepted.

Should I re-send the patchset?

>
>Bjorn


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-28 19:21    [W:0.063 / U:4.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site