lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Sep]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] module: print module name on refcount error
On Mon 28-08-23 14:18:30, Jean Delvare wrote:
[...]
> > > It would likely be better to use refcount_t instead of atomic_t.
> >
> > Patches welcomed.
>
> Michal, do I understand correctly that this would prevent the case our
> customer had (too many gets), but won't make a difference for actual
> too-many-puts situations?


yes, refcount_t cannot protect from too-many-puts because there is not
real way to protect from those AFAICS. At a certain moment you just drop
to 0 and lose your object and all following that is a UAF. But I do not
think this is actually the interesting case at all.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-09-14 21:40    [W:0.065 / U:0.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site