Re: weird use-after-free bug in module_put
From: Dmitry Torokhov
Date: Fri Oct 19 2012 - 13:36:45 EST
On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 06:09:51PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2012 at 09:33:18AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > We are now removing instance of character device corresponding to input
> > device when input device disappears.
> > Ah, I know... cdev is embedded in evdev, but lives longer.. I do want to
> > keep cdev embedded as it allows me to easily get to evdev in
> > evdev_open(), but I need to be able to add and then drop reference to
> > evdev from cdev's ->release() method. This means I need to override it.
> > Or I could have cdev separately allocated, but then I'd like to have a
> > void pointer in "struct cdev" so I could get from it back to
> > corresponding evdev.
> Your real problem is that you have two kobjects embedded into the same
> thing. It can work, but you need to make the secondary (one that does
> *not* free in its ->release()) pin the primary. Sigh... Device model
> sucks, film at 11...
Right, but "cdev" is currently "sealed": it does not allow specifying a
custom release function from which I could unpin primary (evdev). You
are the author/owner of cdev code, so that is why I was asking for
your opinion as to what is the best way to proceed:
1. Allocate cdev separately and add void * to struct cdev so that it is
easy to get to corresponding structure on evdev_open.
2. Keep cdev embedded in evdev but export cdev's cleanup method and
have evdev override ->release with its own version that calls
cdev_default_release() and then unpins evdev stucture.
3. Add struct device *parent to struct cdev and have it pin and unpin it
for us (if it is set up).
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/