On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 11:52:28 -0500
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes I second that! I was thinking about it myself yesterday. And thereYes, that answers my question, thanks for untangling it. We mightAlex, does the above answer your question on what guards against UAF (the
short answer is: matrix_dev->mdevs_lock)?
consider a lockdep_assert_held() in the new
signal_guest_ap_cfg_changed() since it does get called from a variety
of paths and we need that lock to prevent the UAF.
are also a couple of other functions that expect to be called with
certain locks held. I would love to see lockdep_assert_held() there
as well.
Since I went through that code last night I could spin a patch that
catches some of these at least. But if I don't within two weeks, I
won't be grumpy if somebody else picks that up.
Regards,
Halil