From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.cz>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Karsten Keil <kkeil@suse.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
richard kennedy <richard@rsk.demon.co.uk>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk>,
dwmw2@infradead.org, Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Suspicious bug in module refcounting
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:45:07 +1030 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200902101345.08580.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090209151830.GC6018@dhcp35.suse.cz>
On Tuesday 10 February 2009 01:48:31 Michal Hocko wrote:
> Based on this change, would it make sense to update sys_accept to change
> __module_get to try_module_get like in the following patch?
I don't think so:
> /*
> - * We don't need try_module_get here, as the listening socket (sock)
> - * has the protocol module (sock->ops->owner) held.
> + * Socket's owner cannot be in unloading path because there
> + * must be at least one listening reference
> */
> - __module_get(newsock->ops->owner);
> + if (unlikely(!try_module_get(newsock->ops->owner)))
> + BUG();
rmmod --wait can make try_module_get fail even if the reference count isn't
zero. But in this case, we should return an error from the accept call;
presumably the admin really doesn't want us to keep using the module...
Thanks,
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-10 3:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20090203134721.GA11069@pingi.kke.suse.de>
2009-02-04 3:48 ` [RFC] Suspicious bug in module refcounting Rusty Russell
2009-02-04 10:11 ` Russell King
2009-02-04 10:55 ` Rusty Russell
2009-02-04 10:59 ` Russell King
2009-02-04 16:33 ` Dan Williams
2009-02-06 22:41 ` Karsten Keil
2009-02-09 15:18 ` Michal Hocko
2009-02-10 3:15 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2009-02-10 3:42 ` Karsten Keil
2009-02-10 10:31 ` Michal Hocko
2009-02-10 13:36 ` Rusty Russell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200902101345.08580.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=kkeil@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.cz \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=richard@rsk.demon.co.uk \
--cc=rmk+kernel@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).