On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 07:16:34PM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 09:32:08AM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 09:45:39AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 04:36:34PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > > @@ -2048,13 +2048,19 @@ static ssize_t hot_add_show(struct class *class,
> > > > {
> > > > int ret;
> > > >
> > > > + if (!try_module_get(THIS_MODULE))
> > > > + return -ENODEV;
> > > > +
> > >
> > > You can not increment/decrement your own module's reference count and
> > > expect it to work properly, as it is still a race.
> >
> > The goal here is to prevent an rmmod call if this succeeds. If it
> > succeeds then any subsequent rmmod will fail. Can you explain how
> > this is still racy?
>
> {sigh}
>
> What happens if the driver core is just about to call hot_add_show() and
> the module is removed from the system. It then calls to the memory
> location that hot_add_show() was previously at, but now that is not a
> valid pointer to code, and boom.
The new kobject_get() on patch 3/3 ensures that the device will be up
throughout the entire life of the store call, and thus prevent the
code being executed being removed, no?
Luis
