thunderbolt: Fix NULL dereference in tb_remove_work()grafted

There is a slight race between tb_remove_work() and tb_domain_remove()
which leads to dereferencing a NULL tb->root_switch pointer inside
tb_free_unplugged_xdomains():

        Thread A                            Thread B

  tb_remove_work()
                                    tb_domain_remove()
                                      mutex_lock(&tb->lock)
                                      tb_stop()
                                        /* doesn't cancel a running callback */
                                        cancel_delayed_work(&tcm->remove_work)
                                        ...
                                        tb_switch_remove(tb->root_switch)
                                        tb->root_switch = NULL
                                      mutex_unlock(&tb->lock)
    mutex_lock(&tb->lock)
    ...
    /* without checking ->root_switch */
    tb_free_unplugged_xdomains(tb->root_switch)
    mutex_unlock(&tb->lock)

Commit a8937f35cf39 ("thunderbolt: Remove XDomain from the bus without
holding tb->lock") doesn't seem right to move tb_free_unplugged_xdomains()
out of the &tb->lock section and the check for tb->root_switch, in
particular.  It states:

  For this reason separate removing the XDomain from the topology data
  structures (where we need the lock) from unregistering the device from
  the bus (where remove callbacks of the drivers are being called).

tb_free_unplugged_xdomains() belongs to the former group of functions
requiring the lock.  And it also calls tb_xdomain_remove() which should
only be called with &tb->lock held.

Found by Linux Verification Center (linuxtesting.org) with Svace static
analysis tool.

Fixes: a8937f35cf39 ("thunderbolt: Remove XDomain from the bus without holding tb->lock")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@ispras.ru>
Signed-off-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>

1 files changed, 85 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst b/Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..37b201708
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/dev-tools/sparse.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+.. Copyright 2004 Linus Torvalds
+.. Copyright 2004 Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
+.. Copyright 2006 Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>
+
+Sparse
+======
+
+Sparse is a semantic checker for C programs; it can be used to find a
+number of potential problems with kernel code.  See
+https://lwn.net/Articles/689907/ for an overview of sparse; this document
+contains some kernel-specific sparse information.
+More information on sparse, mainly about its internals, can be found in
+its official pages at https://sparse.docs.kernel.org.
+
+
+Using sparse for typechecking
+-----------------------------
+
+"__bitwise" is a type attribute, so you have to do something like this::
+
+        typedef int __bitwise pm_request_t;
+
+        enum pm_request {
+                PM_SUSPEND = (__force pm_request_t) 1,
+                PM_RESUME = (__force pm_request_t) 2
+        };
+
+which makes PM_SUSPEND and PM_RESUME "bitwise" integers (the "__force" is
+there because sparse will complain about casting to/from a bitwise type,
+but in this case we really _do_ want to force the conversion). And because
+the enum values are all the same type, now "enum pm_request" will be that
+type too.
+
+And with gcc, all the "__bitwise"/"__force stuff" goes away, and it all
+ends up looking just like integers to gcc.
+
+Quite frankly, you don't need the enum there. The above all really just
+boils down to one special "int __bitwise" type.
+
+So the simpler way is to just do::
+
+        typedef int __bitwise pm_request_t;
+
+        #define PM_SUSPEND ((__force pm_request_t) 1)
+        #define PM_RESUME ((__force pm_request_t) 2)
+
+and you now have all the infrastructure needed for strict typechecking.
+
+One small note: the constant integer "0" is special. You can use a
+constant zero as a bitwise integer type without sparse ever complaining.
+This is because "bitwise" (as the name implies) was designed for making
+sure that bitwise types don't get mixed up (little-endian vs big-endian
+vs cpu-endian vs whatever), and there the constant "0" really _is_
+special.
+
+Getting sparse
+--------------
+
+You can get tarballs of the latest released versions from:
+https://www.kernel.org/pub/software/devel/sparse/dist/
+
+Alternatively, you can get snapshots of the latest development version
+of sparse using git to clone::
+
+        git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/devel/sparse/sparse.git
+
+Once you have it, just do::
+
+        make
+        make install
+
+as a regular user, and it will install sparse in your ~/bin directory.
+
+Using sparse
+------------
+
+Do a kernel make with "make C=1" to run sparse on all the C files that get
+recompiled, or use "make C=2" to run sparse on the files whether they need to
+be recompiled or not.  The latter is a fast way to check the whole tree if you
+have already built it.
+
+The optional make variable CF can be used to pass arguments to sparse.  The
+build system passes -Wbitwise to sparse automatically.
+
+Note that sparse defines the __CHECKER__ preprocessor symbol.