Hello, On Mon, Aug 15, 2022 at 07:52:27PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > [ Upstream commit 7d4edccc9bbfe1dcdff641343f7b0c6763fbe774 ] > > Taking a lock at the beginning of .remove() doesn't prevent new readers. > With the existing approach it can happen, that a read occurs just when > the lock was taken blocking the reader until the lock is released at the > end of the remove callback which then accessed *data that is already > freed then. > > To actually fix this problem the hwmon core needs some adaption. Until > this is implemented take the optimistic approach of assuming that all > readers are gone after hwmon_device_unregister() and > sysfs_remove_group() as most other drivers do. (And once the core > implements that, taking the lock would deadlock.) > > So drop the lock, move the reset to after device unregistration to keep > the device in a workable state until it's deregistered. Also add a error > message in case the reset fails and return 0 anyhow. (Returning an error > code, doesn't stop the platform device unregistration and only results > in a little helpful error message before the devm cleanup handlers are > called.) > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220725194344.150098-1-u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> Does this mean my concerns I expressed in the mail with Message-Id: 20220814155638.idxnihylofsxqlql@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx were not taken into consideration? Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
