ALSA: pcm : Call kill_fasync() in stream lock

commit 3aa02cb664c5fb1042958c8d1aa8c35055a2ebc4 upstream.

Currently kill_fasync() is called outside the stream lock in
snd_pcm_period_elapsed().  This is potentially racy, since the stream
may get released even during the irq handler is running.  Although
snd_pcm_release_substream() calls snd_pcm_drop(), this doesn't
guarantee that the irq handler finishes, thus the kill_fasync() call
outside the stream spin lock may be invoked after the substream is
detached, as recently reported by KASAN.

As a quick workaround, move kill_fasync() call inside the stream
lock.  The fasync is rarely used interface, so this shouldn't have a
big impact from the performance POV.

Ideally, we should implement some sync mechanism for the proper finish
of stream and irq handler.  But this oneliner should suffice for most
cases, so far.

Change-Id: Ifbe9dee4b884ece32bce50b486b62b88c5816486
Tracked-On: https://jira01.devtools.intel.com/browse/AW-5094


Reported-by: Baozeng Ding <sploving1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Reviewed-on: https://android.intel.com/577960


Reviewed-by: Louis, FabienX <fabienx.louis@intel.com>
Tested-by: Louis, FabienX <fabienx.louis@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Dubray, SimonX <simonx.dubray@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Tasayco Loarte, VictorX <victorx.tasayco.loarte@intel.com>

sound/core/pcm_lib.c

@@ -1864,10 +1864,10 @@ void snd_pcm_period_elapsed(struct snd_pcm_substream *substream)
 	if (substream->timer_running)
 		snd_timer_interrupt(substream->timer, 1);
  _end:
+	kill_fasync(&runtime->fasync, SIGIO, POLL_IN);
 	snd_pcm_stream_unlock_irqrestore(substream, flags);
 	if (runtime->transfer_ack_end)
 		runtime->transfer_ack_end(substream);
-	kill_fasync(&runtime->fasync, SIGIO, POLL_IN);
 }
 
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(snd_pcm_period_elapsed);