netdev - Re: [PATCH] bonding: clear header_ops when last slave detached (v2)

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:	Fri, 21 Nov 2014 10:17:12 -0800
From:	Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>
To:	Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Wengang <wen.gang.wang@...cle.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bonding: clear header_ops when last slave detached (v2)

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Jay Vosburgh
<jay.vosburgh@...onical.com> wrote:
> Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com> wrote:
>
>>Also, no one seems to care about my previous question:
>>why only bonding has the problem?
>
>         Bonding has the problem because it stashes a pointer to a data
> structure (the header_ops) from another module, and when that module is
> unloaded the dangling pointer may be dereferenced if it's not either
> cleared or made to never go away.

I knew, please re-read my question, I was asking why ONLY bonding
has the problem, i.e. why not neigh or whatever else calling
header_ops->foo()? :)

As I said, I may miss some try_get_module() somewhere of course.
Needs more digging.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html