From: Steve French stfrench@microsoft.com
[ Upstream commit 943fb67b090212f1d3789eb7796b1c9045c62fd6 ]
Coverity noted a place where we were not grabbing the ses_lock when setting (and checking) ses_status.
Addresses-Coverity: 1536833 ("Data race condition (MISSING_LOCK)") Reviewed-by: Paulo Alcantara (SUSE) pc@manguebit.com Reviewed-by: Bharath SM bharathsm@microsoft.com Signed-off-by: Steve French stfrench@microsoft.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- fs/cifs/connect.c | 8 ++++++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/cifs/connect.c b/fs/cifs/connect.c index 985e962cf0858..860e533ad1bf0 100644 --- a/fs/cifs/connect.c +++ b/fs/cifs/connect.c @@ -1965,18 +1965,22 @@ void cifs_put_smb_ses(struct cifs_ses *ses) /* ses_count can never go negative */ WARN_ON(ses->ses_count < 0);
+ spin_lock(&ses->ses_lock); if (ses->ses_status == SES_GOOD) ses->ses_status = SES_EXITING;
- cifs_free_ipc(ses); - if (ses->ses_status == SES_EXITING && server->ops->logoff) { + spin_unlock(&ses->ses_lock); + cifs_free_ipc(ses); xid = get_xid(); rc = server->ops->logoff(xid, ses); if (rc) cifs_server_dbg(VFS, "%s: Session Logoff failure rc=%d\n", __func__, rc); _free_xid(xid); + } else { + spin_unlock(&ses->ses_lock); + cifs_free_ipc(ses); }
spin_lock(&cifs_tcp_ses_lock);