Re: [PATCH] fs: Assert on module file_operations without an owner

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 01:35:52PM -0700, Calvin Owens wrote:
> Omitting the owner field in file_operations declared in modules is an
> easy mistake to make, and can result in crashes when the module is
> unloaded while userspace is poking the file.
> 
> This patch modifies fops_get() to WARN when it encounters a NULL owner,
> since in this case it cannot take a reference on the containing module.

NAK.  This is complete crap - we do *NOT* need ->owner on a lot of
file_operations.
	* we do not need that on file_operations of a regular file or
directory on a normal filesystem, since that filesystem is not going
away until the file has been closed - ->f_path.mnt is holding a reference
to vfsmount, which is holding a reference to superblock, which is holding
a reference to file_system_type, which is holding a reference to _its_
->owner.
	* we do not need that on anything on procfs - module removal is
legal while a procfs file is opened; its cleanup will be blocked for the
duration of ->read(), ->write(), etc. calls.

If anything, we would be better off with modifications that would get
rid of ->owner on file_operations.  It's not trivial to do, but it might
be not impossible.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux