On Tue, Apr 02, 2019 at 05:06:34AM -0700, Yufen Yu wrote:
> commit 2da78092dda "block: Fix dev_t minor allocation lifetime"
> specifically moved blk_free_devt(dev->devt) call to part_release()
> to avoid reallocating device number before the device is fully
> shutdown.
> 
> However, it can cause use-after-free on gendisk in get_gendisk().
> We use md device as example to show the race scenes:
> 
> Process1              Worker                  Process2
> md_free
>                                               blkdev_open
> del_gendisk
>   add delete_partition_work_fn() to wq
>                                               __blkdev_get
>                                               get_gendisk
> put_disk
>   disk_release
>     kfree(disk)
>                                               find part from ext_devt_idr
>                                               get_disk_and_module(disk)
>                                               cause use after free
> 
>                       delete_partition_work_fn
>                       put_device(part)
>                       part_release
>                       remove part from ext_devt_idr
> 
> Before <devt, hd_struct pointer> is removed from ext_devt_idr by
> delete_partition_work_fn(), we can find the devt and then access
> gendisk by hd_struct pointer. But, if we access the gendisk after
> it have been freed, it can cause in use-after-freeon gendisk in
> get_gendisk().
> 
> We fix this by adding a new helper blk_invalidate_devt() in
> delete_partition() and del_gendisk(). It replaces hd_struct
> pointer in idr with value 'NULL', and deletes the entry from
> idr in part_release() as we do now.
> 
> Thanks to Jan Kara for providing the solution and more clear comments
> for the code.
> 
> Fixes: 2da78092dda1 ("block: Fix dev_t minor allocation lifetime")
> Cc: Al Viro <[email protected]>
> Cc: Bart Van Assche <[email protected]>
> Cc: Keith Busch <[email protected]>
> Suggested-by: Jan Kara <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Yufen Yu <[email protected]>

Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Keith Busch <[email protected]>

Reply via email to