Re: [PATCH 1/5] dmaengine: Store module owner in dma_device struct

[Vinod Koul]

On 12-11-19, 09:45, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2019-11-11 10:56 p.m., Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 11-11-19, 09:50, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2019-11-09 10:18 a.m., Vinod Koul wrote:
> >>> Hi Logan,
> >>>
> >>> Sorry for delay in reply!
> >>>
> >>> On 22-10-19, 15:46, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> >>>> dma_chan_to_owner() dereferences the driver from the struct device to
> >>>> obtain the owner and call module_[get|put](). However, if the backing
> >>>> device is unbound before the dma_device is unregistered, the driver
> >>>> will be cleared and this will cause a NULL pointer dereference.
> >>>
> >>> Have you been able to repro this? If so how..?
> >>>
> >>> The expectation is that the driver shall unregister before removed.
> >>
> >> Yes, with my new driver, if I do a PCI unbind (which unregisters) while
> >> the DMA engine is in use, it panics. The point is the underlying driver
> >> can go away before the channel is removed.
> > 
> > and in your driver remove you do not unregister? When unbind is invoked
> > the driver remove is invoked by core and you should unregister whatever
> > you have registered in your probe!
> >
> > Said that, if someone is using the dmaengine at that point of time, it
> > is not a nice thing to do and can cause issues, but on idle it should
> > just work!
> 
> But that's the problem. We can't expect our users to be "nice" and not
> unbind when the driver is in use. Killing the kernel if the user
> unexpectedly unbinds is not acceptable.

And that is why we review the code and ensure this does not happen and
behaviour is as expected

> >> I suspect this is less of an issue for most devices as they wouldn't
> >> normally be unbound while in use (for example there's really no reason
> >> to ever unbind IOAT seeing it's built into the system). Though, the fact
> >> is, the user could unbind these devices at anytime and we don't want to
> >> panic if they do.
> > 
> > There are many drivers which do modules so yes I am expecting unbind and
> > even a bind following that to work
> 
> Except they will panic if they unbind while in use, so that's a
> questionable definition of "work".

dmaengine core has module reference so while they are being used they
won't be removed (unless I complete misread the driver core behaviour)

-- 
~Vinod