[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18c3b245f39.5eac9b5898943.4628342226240608054@siddh.me>
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2023 23:31:28 +0530
From: Siddh Raman Pant <code@...dh.me>
To: "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"Suman Ghosh" <sumang@...vell.com>,
"netdev" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"syzbot+bbe84a4010eeea00982d"
<syzbot+bbe84a4010eeea00982d@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/2] nfc: llcp_core: Hold a ref to
llcp_local->dev when holding a ref to llcp_local
On Tue, 05 Dec 2023 22:57:28 +0530, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> Mismatched order with get. Unwinding is always in reversed order. Or
> >> maybe other order is here on purpose? Then it needs to be explained.
> >
> > Yes, local_release() will free local, so local->dev cannot be accessed.
> > Will add a comment.
>
> So the problem is just storing the pointer? That's not really the valid
> reason.
Oops, my bad. What would be the valid reason? (if any)
Thanks,
Siddh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists