Re: [PATCH v4 3/5] tee: generic TEE subsystem
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: 2015-07-08 23:53:30
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 05:16:12PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 03:33:25PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:quoted
quoted
The basic issue is that cdev_del doesn't seem to be synchronizing. The use after free race is then something like: struct tpm_chip { struct device dev; struct cdev cdev;Oops, right there's your problem. You can't have two reference counted objects trying to manage the memory of a single structure. No matter what you do, it's going to be a pain to deal with this, so don't :)Sure, generally, yes, but that isn't done for no reason, it is to make open straightforward: static int tpm_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) { struct tpm_chip *chip = container_of(inode->i_cdev, struct tpm_chip, cdev); We need to recover the tpm_chip associated with the char device node, in a way that is holding a kref on it, without racing with cdev_del/etc This scheme does mean that if we have a struct file we have a kref on the cdev, and if we have cdev then we have a kref on the tpm_chip, which is really easy to use properly.quoted
quoted
Ie we need cdev to hold a ref on tpm_chip->dev until cdev_put is called.No, separate them, make the cdev a pointer and all should be fine.Okay, cdev_alloc takes care of the cdev lifetime. Do you have a simple solution to replace container_of as well? What would you think about something like: cdev_alloc(&chip->dev.kref)
Just pick either the cdev to handle the lifetime rules, or the struct device, you'll still need a container_of(). Just don't do both as odds are the lifetime rules is going to get really hard to debug and ensure that everything is correct on the shutdown/release path. thanks, greg k-h