lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Nov]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: mm_release() call in exit_mm() looks dangerous
Jesper Juhl wrote:
> In kernel/exit.c we have this code :
>
> static void exit_mm(struct task_struct * tsk)
> {
> struct mm_struct *mm = tsk->mm;
>
> mm_release(tsk, mm);
> if (!mm)
> return;
> ...
>
>
> But, mm_release() may dereference it's second argument ('mm'), so
> shouldn't we be doing the "!mm" test *before* we call mm_release() and
> not after?
> I don't know the mm code well enough to be able to tell if some of the
> other stuff mm_release does needs to be done always and the mm
> dereference can't actually happen, but maybe someone else who knows
> the code better can tell... In any case, what's currently there looks
> a little shaky..
>

Yeah, it looks wrong. mm_release() calls deactivate_mm() as its first
act, which could well dereference mm (though it often doesn't).

J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-11-13 01:53    [W:0.385 / U:0.776 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site