linux-kernel - Re: [BUG 2.6.36-rc6] list corruption in module_bug

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 5 Oct 2010 15:44:51 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
	Brandon Philips <brandon@...p.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG 2.6.36-rc6] list corruption in module_bug_finalize

On Tue, 5 Oct 2010 09:13:38 am Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> The patch below cures it.

Using module_mutex here is just lazy...  Here's 5c, go buy your own lock :)

>  	/*
> -	 * Strictly speaking this should have a spinlock to protect against
> -	 * traversals, but since we only traverse on BUG()s, a spinlock
> -	 * could potentially lead to deadlock and thus be counter-productive.
> +	 * We need to take module_mutex here to protect the list add, though
> +	 * it won't protect against a concurrent BUG().
>  	 */
> +	mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
>  	list_add(&mod->bug_list, &module_bug_list);
> +	mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
>  
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
>  void module_bug_cleanup(struct module *mod)
>  {
> +	mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
>  	list_del(&mod->bug_list);
> +	mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
>  }
>  
>  #else
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/