Re: [RFC] Input: Remove unsafe device module references

[David Herrmann]

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Dmitry Torokhov
<dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 07:09:27PM +0100, David Herrmann wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:52:11PM +0100, David Herrmann wrote:
>> >> My solution: Some parent subsystem of us must take and release this
>> >> module-refcnt instead of us, so this bug doesn't occur.
>> >
>> > Yes, that is the ultimate solution for something like this.
>> >
>> > But, in reality, we don't care about module unloading races as there are
>> > plenty of other issues involved there where things can go bad, so we
>> > just try the best we can :)
>>
>> Ah, I am kind of relieved that I got this right. I almost started
>> thinking I am insane.. ;)
>>
>> So your answer is that this is so unlikely that it won't be fixed? I
>> am fine with that, even though I wonder why stuff like "struct
>> file_operations" include "owner" fields to protect callbacks but
>> "struct device_type" does *not* include any protection of it's
>> "release" callback.
>
> I think adding owner to device_type might not be a bad idea at all...

Exactly. But Greg does not seem to be very amused by that idea :-/

> Thanks.
>
> --
> Dmitry

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