On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 12:29:11PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > "Since ramfs/devpts uses get_tree_nodev() it doesn't rely on > sb->s_fs_info. So there's no use after free risk as with other > filesystems. > > But there's no need to deviate from the standard cleanup logic and cause > reviewers to verify whether that is safe or not." > > and similar for the other two: > > "Since hypfs/selinuxfs uses get_tree_single() it doesn't rely on > sb->s_fs_info. So there's no use after free risk as with other > filesystems. > > But there's no need to deviate from the standard cleanup logic and cause > reviewers to verify whether that is safe or not." > > If that is good enough for people then I can grab it. Fine with me. And yes, I'd rather not have private data freed before SB_ACTIVE is cleared even if it is fine right now. It's just a bug waiting to happen.
