netdev - Re:[RFC PATCH 0/1] prevent premature device unregister via

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: <A8D63D10-7BE1-4EA9-8020-03D69A81C750@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2026 15:12:31 +0200
From: Sergey Ryazanov <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com>
To: Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@....com>
CC: Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@....qualcomm.com>,
 Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
 Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 Daniele Palmas <dnlplm@...il.com>
Subject: Re:[RFC PATCH 0/1] prevent premature device unregister via

On January 8, 2026 1:01:01 PM, Slark Xiao <slark_xiao@....com> wrote:
>
>
>At 2026-01-08 10:05:17, "Sergey Ryazanov" <ryazanov.s.a@...il.com> wrote:
>>Initially I was unable to hit or reproduce the issue with hwsim since it
>>unregister the WWAN device ops as a last step effectively holding the
>>WWAN device when all the regular WWAN ports are already removed. Thanks
>>to the detiled report of Daniele and the fix proposed by Loic, it became
>>obvious what a releasing sequence leads to the crash.
>>
>>With WWAN device ops unregistration done first in hwsim, I was able to
>>easily reproduce the WWAN device premature unregister, and develop
>>another fix avoiding a dummy port allocation and relying on a reference
>>counting. See details in the RFC patch.
>>
>>Loic, what do you think about this way of the users tracking?
>>
>>Slark, if you would like to go with the proposed patch, just remove the
>>patch #7 from the series and insert the proposed patch between between
>>#1 and #2. Of if you prefer, I can reassemble the whole series and send
>>it as RFC v5.
>>
>
>Please help reassemble them and send it as RFC v5.

Will do it tonight.

--
Sergey
Hi Slark,