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  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, 9 Oct 2020 08:33:41 -0700
From:   Steve deRosier <>
To:     Johannes Berg <>
Cc:     Taehee Yoo <>, Nicolai Stange <>,
        David Laight <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 000/117] net: avoid to remove module when its debugfs
 is being used

On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 3:22 AM Johannes Berg <> wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-10-09 at 19:15 +0900, Taehee Yoo wrote:
> >
> > Okay, as you mentioned earlier in 001/117 patch thread,
> > I will squash patches into per-driver/subsystem then send them as v2.
> Give me a bit. I think I figured out a less intrusive way that at least
> means we don't have to do it if the fops doesn't have ->release(), which
> is the vast majority.

While I'm all for a patch that fixes something at a single level
instead of touching 100s of files, let me ask a loosely related, but
more basic, question: Should `->owner` be set properly in each driver?
 Or the flip of that, should we be considering that it isn't a
semantic error? I don't know the answer myself, I just thought to ask
the question.

IMHO, if true that `->owner` should be set for "correctness", and even
if we fix the debugfs problem elsewhere, perhaps this series (squashed
of course) should be merged.

- Steve

Powered by blists - more mailing lists