lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [RFC] Input: Remove unsafe device module references
From
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:52:11PM +0100, David Herrmann wrote:
>> My solution: Some parent subsystem of us must take and release this
>> module-refcnt instead of us, so this bug doesn't occur.
>
> Yes, that is the ultimate solution for something like this.
>
> But, in reality, we don't care about module unloading races as there are
> plenty of other issues involved there where things can go bad, so we
> just try the best we can :)

Ah, I am kind of relieved that I got this right. I almost started
thinking I am insane.. ;)

So your answer is that this is so unlikely that it won't be fixed? I
am fine with that, even though I wonder why stuff like "struct
file_operations" include "owner" fields to protect callbacks but
"struct device_type" does *not* include any protection of it's
"release" callback.
This is why I thought calling module_get/put() inside the driver-core
would be just consistent with other subsystems.

But if this race is fine, I will simply copy it.

> thanks,
>
> greg k-h

Sorry for the confusion and thanks for your answers.
Regards
David


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-11-01 19:11    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean