Re: [PATCH] x86: check for valid irq_cfg pointer insmp_irq_move_cleanup_interrupt

[Suresh Siddha]

On Thu, 2012-05-24 at 09:37 -0500, Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
> And speaking of possible holes in destroy_irq()..
> 
> What happens if we're running __assign_irq_vector() (say we're changing irq
> affinity), and on another cpu we had just run through __clear_irq_vector()
> via destroy_irq().  Now destroy_irq() is going to call
> free_irq_at()->free_irq_cfg, which will clear irq_cfg.  Then
> __assign_irq_vector goes to access irq_cfg (cfg->vector or
> cfg->move_in_progress, for instance), which was already freed.
> 
> I'm not sure if this can happen, but just eyeballing it, it does look that
> that way.
> 

I wanted to say, irq desc is locked when we change the irq affinity,
which calls assign_irq_vector() and friends, so this should be fine.

BUT NO. I don't see any reference counts being maintained when we do
irq_to_desc(). So locking/unlocking that desc pointer is bogus when
destroy_irq() can go ahead and free the desc in parallel.

So, SPARSE_IRQ looks terribly broken! Yinghai, Thomas?

thanks,
suresh

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/