Re: [PATCH v2] fpga: region: add owner module and take its refcount
From: Xu Yilun
Date: Mon Apr 01 2024 - 05:39:05 EST
On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 05:00:20PM +0100, Marco Pagani wrote:
> The current implementation of the fpga region assumes that the low-level
> module registers a driver for the parent device and uses its owner pointer
> to take the module's refcount. This approach is problematic since it can
> lead to a null pointer dereference while attempting to get the region
> during programming if the parent device does not have a driver.
>
> To address this problem, add a module owner pointer to the fpga_region
> struct and use it to take the module's refcount. Modify the functions for
> registering a region to take an additional owner module parameter and
> rename them to avoid conflicts. Use the old function names for helper
> macros that automatically set the module that registers the region as the
> owner. This ensures compatibility with existing low-level control modules
> and reduces the chances of registering a region without setting the owner.
>
> Also, update the documentation to keep it consistent with the new interface
> for registering an fpga region.
>
> Other changes: unlock the mutex before calling put_device() in
> fpga_region_put() to avoid potential use after release issues.
Please try not to mix different changes in one patch, especially for
a "bug fix" as you said.
And I do have concern about the fix, see below.
[...]
> @@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static struct fpga_region *fpga_region_get(struct fpga_region *region)
> }
>
> get_device(dev);
> - if (!try_module_get(dev->parent->driver->owner)) {
> + if (!try_module_get(region->br_owner)) {
> put_device(dev);
> mutex_unlock(®ion->mutex);
> return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
> @@ -75,9 +75,9 @@ static void fpga_region_put(struct fpga_region *region)
>
> dev_dbg(dev, "put\n");
>
> - module_put(dev->parent->driver->owner);
> - put_device(dev);
> + module_put(region->br_owner);
> mutex_unlock(®ion->mutex);
If there is concern the region would be freed after put_device(), then
why still keep the sequence in fpga_region_get()?
And is it possible region is freed before get_device() in
fpga_region_get()?
Or we should clearly document how/when to use these functions?
Thanks,
Yilun
> + put_device(dev);
> }