On Tuesday October 31, [email protected] wrote:
>
> But I noticed that even if we have this kind of smp-safe code, there
> is no guarantee that 2nd auth_domain_put() in
> svcauth_gss_unregister_pseudoflavor() is the last reference of
> this gss_domain.
>
> So it is possible to happen invalid dereference by real last user of
> this gss_domain after unloading module. If this is not wrong,
> Is it neccesary to have try_get_module()/put_module() somewhere to
> prevent this?
After a quick look, it seems to me that one reasonable option would
be:
svcauth_gss_register_pseudoflavor
returns a void* which is 'new', and possible calls try_get_module(),
failing if that fails. and
svcauth_gss_unregister_pseudoflavor
takes the void* (not a name) and calls auth_domain_put on it, and
then calls put_module().
'struct pf_desc' would have to gain a
void * handle;
to hold the returned value.
Would that solve the problem as you see it?
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
