lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jul]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] bfq: Check if bfqq is NULL in bfq_insert_request
From
Date
On 7/23/19 4:29 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 10:30:48AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> In bfq_insert_request(), bfqq is initialized with:
>> bfqq = bfq_init_rq(rq);
>> In bfq_init_rq(), we find:
>> if (unlikely(!rq->elv.icq))
>> return NULL;
>> Indeed, rq->elv.icq can be NULL if the memory allocation in
>> create_task_io_context() failed.
>>
>
> The above function should have been ioc_create_icq(), sorry.
>
> Guenter
>
>> A comment in bfq_insert_request() suggests that bfqq is supposed to be
>> non-NULL if 'at_head || blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq)' is false. Yet, as
>> debugging and practical experience shows, this is not the case in the
>> above situation.
>>
>> This results in the following crash.
>>
>> Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference
>> at virtual address 00000000000001b0
>> ...
>> Call trace:
>> bfq_setup_cooperator+0x44/0x134
>> bfq_insert_requests+0x10c/0x630
>> blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0x60/0xb4
>> blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x290/0x2d4
>> blk_flush_plug_list+0xe0/0x230
>> blk_finish_plug+0x30/0x40
>> generic_writepages+0x60/0x94
>> blkdev_writepages+0x24/0x30
>> do_writepages+0x74/0xac
>> __filemap_fdatawrite_range+0x94/0xc8
>> file_write_and_wait_range+0x44/0xa0
>> blkdev_fsync+0x38/0x68
>> vfs_fsync_range+0x68/0x80
>> do_fsync+0x44/0x80
>>
>> The problem is relatively easy to reproduce by running an image with
>> failslab enabled, such as with:
>>
>> cd /sys/kernel/debug/failslab
>> echo 10 > probability
>> echo 300 > times
>>
>> Avoid the problem by checking if bfqq is NULL before using it. With the
>> NULL check in place, requests with missing io context are queued
>> immediately, and the crash is no longer seen.
>>


What about other place use blk_init_rq()?
E.g in bfq_request_merged():
1897 struct bfq_queue *bfqq = bfq_init_rq(req);
1898 struct bfq_data *bfqd = bfqq->bfqd;

Which may have same Null-pointer bug?

-Bob

>> Fixes: 18e5a57d79878 ("block, bfq: postpone rq preparation to insert or merge")
>> Reported-by: Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@google.com>
>> Cc: Hsin-Yi Wang <hsinyi@google.com>
>> Cc: Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@chromium.org>
>> Cc: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>> ---
>> block/bfq-iosched.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/block/bfq-iosched.c b/block/bfq-iosched.c
>> index 72860325245a..56f3f4227010 100644
>> --- a/block/bfq-iosched.c
>> +++ b/block/bfq-iosched.c
>> @@ -5417,7 +5417,7 @@ static void bfq_insert_request(struct blk_mq_hw_ctx *hctx, struct request *rq,
>>
>> spin_lock_irq(&bfqd->lock);
>> bfqq = bfq_init_rq(rq);
>> - if (at_head || blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq)) {
>> + if (!bfqq || at_head || blk_rq_is_passthrough(rq)) {
>> if (at_head)
>> list_add(&rq->queuelist, &bfqd->dispatch);
>> else
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-07-23 01:37    [W:0.119 / U:16.592 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site