Messages in this thread | | | From | Dongliang Mu <> | Date | Tue, 15 Mar 2022 20:44:04 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] fs: erofs: remember if kobject_init_and_add was done |
| |
On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 8:26 PM Gao Xiang <hsiangkao@linux.alibaba.com> wrote: > > Hi Dongliang, > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 07:59:26PM +0800, Dongliang Mu wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 7:05 PM Huang Jianan <jnhuang95@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > 在 2022/3/15 18:55, Gao Xiang 写道: > > > > On Tue, Mar 15, 2022 at 06:43:01PM +0800, Huang Jianan wrote: > > > >> 在 2022/3/15 15:51, Dongliang Mu 写道: > > > >>> From: Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@gmail.com> > > > >>> > > > >>> Syzkaller hit 'WARNING: kobject bug in erofs_unregister_sysfs'. This bug > > > >>> is triggered by injecting fault in kobject_init_and_add of > > > >>> erofs_unregister_sysfs. > > > >>> > > > >>> Fix this by remembering if kobject_init_and_add is successful. > > > >>> > > > >>> Note that I've tested the patch and the crash does not occur any more. > > > >>> > > > >>> Reported-by: syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Dongliang Mu <mudongliangabcd@gmail.com> > > > >>> --- > > > >>> fs/erofs/internal.h | 1 + > > > >>> fs/erofs/sysfs.c | 9 ++++++--- > > > >>> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > >>> > > > >>> diff --git a/fs/erofs/internal.h b/fs/erofs/internal.h > > > >>> index 5aa2cf2c2f80..9e20665e3f68 100644 > > > >>> --- a/fs/erofs/internal.h > > > >>> +++ b/fs/erofs/internal.h > > > >>> @@ -144,6 +144,7 @@ struct erofs_sb_info { > > > >>> u32 feature_incompat; > > > >>> /* sysfs support */ > > > >>> + bool s_sysfs_inited; > > > >> Hi Dongliang, > > > >> > > > >> How about using sbi->s_kobj.state_in_sysfs to avoid adding a extra member in > > > >> sbi ? > > > > Ok, I have no tendency of these (I'm fine with either ways). > > > > I've seen some usage like: > > > > > > > > static inline int device_is_registered(struct device *dev) > > > > { > > > > return dev->kobj.state_in_sysfs; > > > > } > > > > > > > > But I'm still not sure if we need to rely on such internal > > > > interface.. More thoughts? > > > > > > Yeah... It seems that it is better to use some of the interfaces > > > provided by kobject, > > > otherwise we should still maintain this state in sbi. > > > > > > > I am fine with either way. Let me know if you reach to an agreement. > > If you have time, would you mind sending another patch by using > state_in_sysfs? I'd like to know Chao's perference later, and > apply one of them...
OK, let me test this patch in my local workspace. If it works, I will send it later.
> > Thanks, > Gao Xiang >
| |