> On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:04:28PM +0300, Elena Reshetova wrote:
> > refcount_t type and corresponding API should be
> > used instead of atomic_t when the variable is used as
> > a reference counter. This allows to avoid accidental
> > refcounter overflows that might lead to use-after-free
> > situations.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Elena Reshetova <elena.reshetova@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Hans Liljestrand <ishkamiel@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: David Windsor <dwindsor@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> I'll let tglx comment on the SoB chain, I know he likes those :-) You
> did Cc him right, seeing how he's the maintainer of this stuff..
>
> *sigh* you didn't :-( After so many patches send you _really_ should
> know to Cc the right people.
It is not so trivial as you might think. Unless right person shows up as maintainer/supporter
when I run get_maintainer script, it is hard to figure out who is the right CC person.
And the amount of sending patches doesn't help, because if a person reacts on
patches and asks to change/fix stuff, it doesn't mean he is the right person,
he might be just reading mailing list and having time to do reviews :(
That's said, I will try to improve the CC list.
>
> > ---
> > kernel/futex.c | 13 +++++++------
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> > @@ -814,7 +815,7 @@ static struct futex_pi_state *alloc_pi_state(void)
> >
> > static void get_pi_state(struct futex_pi_state *pi_state)
> > {
> > - WARN_ON_ONCE(!atomic_inc_not_zero(&pi_state->refcount));
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(!refcount_inc_not_zero(&pi_state->refcount));
> > }
>
> I think we have refcount_inc() for just that case, no?
>
Yes, this slipped through. Will fix so it would look shorted. Thank you for catching it!
Best Regards,
Elena.
