lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectPossible race in hysdn.ko
Date
Hello.

While searching for races in the Linux kernel I've come across
"drivers/isdn/hysdn/hysdn.ko" module. Here is a question that I came up
with while analysing results. Lines are given using the info from Linux
v4.12.

In hysdn_proclog.c file in put_log_buffer function a non-standard type
of synchronization is employed. It uses pd->del_lock as some kind of
semaphore (hysdn_proclog.c: lines 129 and 143). Consider the following
case:

Thread 1: Thread 2:
hysdn_log_write
-> hysdn_add_log
-> put_log_buffer
spin_lock() hysdn_conf_open
i = pd->del_lock++ -> hysdn_add_log
spin_unlock() -> put_log_buffer
if (!i) <delete-loop> spin_lock()
pd->del_lock-- i = pd->del_lock++
spin_unlock()
if (!i) <delete-loop>
pd->del_lock--

<delete-loop> - the loop that deletes unused buffer entries
(hysdn_proclog.c: lines 134-142).
pd->del_lock-- is not an atomic operation and is executed without any
locks. Thus it may interfere in the increment process of pd->del_lock in
another thread. There may be cases that lead to the inability of any
thread going through the <delete-loop>.

I see several possible solutions to this problem:
1) move the <delete-loop> under the spin_lock and delete
pd->del_lock synchronization;
2) wrap pd->del_lock-- with spin_lock protection.

What do you think should be done about it?

Thank you for your time.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-27 18:19    [W:0.049 / U:1.356 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site