netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: delete /proc THIS

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]

Message-ID: <20180115204053.GB6942@avx2>
Date:   Mon, 15 Jan 2018 23:40:53 +0300
From:   Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: delete /proc THIS_MODULE references

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 02:50:12PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
> Date: Sat, 13 Jan 2018 20:11:52 +0300
> 
> > /proc has been ignoring struct file_operations::owner field for ages.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
> 
> What, then, makes sure that the procfs files are unregistered before the
> referencing module is unloaded?

Core /proc code does the magic just like core net code deletes
interfaces correctly if ethernet modules gets deleted. Most fs/proc/inode.c
is dedicated to this.

> Please explain the situation, and add a reference to the commit that
> made procfs stop using the fops owner field.  That commit and it's
> commit message may help explain why all of this is fine.

Sure. It was ~10 years ago :^)