On Sat, Apr 01, 2017 at 11:22:03AM +0200, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> On 31/03/17 22:46, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 02:20:27PM +0200, Hans Verkuil wrote:
> >> +struct cec_notifier *cec_notifier_get(struct device *dev)
> >> +{
> >> + struct cec_notifier *n;
> >> +
> >> + mutex_lock(&cec_notifiers_lock);
> >> + list_for_each_entry(n, &cec_notifiers, head) {
> >> + if (n->dev == dev) {
> >> + mutex_unlock(&cec_notifiers_lock);
> >> + kref_get(&n->kref);
> >
> > Isn't this racy? What stops one thread trying to get the notifier
> > while another thread puts the notifier?
> >
>
> Both get and put take the global cec_notifiers_lock mutex.
No, that doesn't help:
Thread 0 Thread 1
mutex_lock()
list_for_each_entry()
if()
mutex_unlock()
mutex_lock()
kref_put()
list_del()
kfree()
mutex_unlock()
kref_get()
So, it's possible that kref_get() can be called on kfree'd memory.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
