Messages in this thread | | | From | Tomas Bortoli <> | Date | Tue, 9 Oct 2018 15:19:42 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] 9p/trans_fd: put worker reqs on destroy |
| |
Il giorno mar 9 ott 2018 alle ore 06:06 Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@codewreck.org> ha scritto: > > From: Dominique Martinet <dominique.martinet@cea.fr> > > p9_read_work/p9_write_work might still hold references to a req after > having been cancelled; make sure we put any of these to avoid potential > request leak on disconnect. > > Fixes: 728356dedeff8 ("9p: Add refcount to p9_req_t") > Signed-off-by: Dominique Martinet <dominique.martinet@cea.fr> > Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen <ericvh@gmail.com> > Cc: Latchesar Ionkov <lucho@ionkov.net> > Cc: Tomas Bortoli <tomasbortoli@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Tomas Bortoli <tomasbortoli@gmail.com> > --- > Noticed we could leak a ref while looking at the syzbot report, > this should be safe enough after the work has been cancelled... > Probably. > > net/9p/trans_fd.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/net/9p/trans_fd.c b/net/9p/trans_fd.c > index a0317d459cde..f868cf6fba79 100644 > --- a/net/9p/trans_fd.c > +++ b/net/9p/trans_fd.c > @@ -876,7 +876,15 @@ static void p9_conn_destroy(struct p9_conn *m) > > p9_mux_poll_stop(m); > cancel_work_sync(&m->rq); > + if (m->rreq) { > + p9_req_put(m->rreq); > + m->rreq = NULL; > + } > cancel_work_sync(&m->wq); > + if (m->wreq) { > + p9_req_put(m->wreq); > + m->wreq = NULL; > + } > > p9_conn_cancel(m, -ECONNRESET); > > -- > 2.19.1 >
LGTM -- Tomas
| |