Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 7 Jul 2023 11:56:49 -0700
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc:     Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>, linux-modules@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module: print module name on refcount error
Message-ID: <ZKhf8bi/eBDhaihD@bombadil.infradead.org>
References: <20230626123252.73dbc139@endymion.delvare>
 <ZJ9fvQZ4k+zFfXbN@bombadil.infradead.org>
 <ZKLRaq3pzzE2gfws@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZKLRaq3pzzE2gfws@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Sender: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 03:47:22PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 30-06-23 16:05:33, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> [...]
> > What prevents code from racing the free with a random module_put()
> > called by some other piece of code?
> 
> Wouldn't be ref count a garbage already? How can you race when freeing
> if module_put fail?

It could yes, ie, so this risks at all being junk. So best IMHO is
to tidy up all the get / puts and add respective tests to fix all
this mess with proper messages as needed. My cursory review of the
refcnt stuf is I see some races possible.

While I'd be happy to help debugging aids, adding accesses to random
memory for a string seems more risk prone.

  Luis