Re: [PATCH 1/2] devcoredump: Remove devcoredump device if failing device is gone

[Johannes Berg]

On Tue, 2024-01-30 at 10:16 -0500, Rodrigo Vivi wrote:
> > 
> > But I'd rather not, it
> > feels weird to have a need for it.
> 
> We could change or CI and instruct our devs to always write
> something to 'data' to ensure that devcoredump is deleted
> before we can reload our module. Maybe that's the right
> approach indeed, although I would really prefer to have
> a direct way.

That's not really what I meant :-) I think we can agree that it's wrong
for the kernel to be _able_ to run into some kind of use-after-free if
userspace isn't doing the right thing here!

What I meant though is: it's weird for 'data' to actually depend on the
struct device being still around, no? Whatever you want 'data' to be,
couldn't you arrange it so that it's valid as long as the module isn't
removed, so that the 'data' pointer literally encapsulates the needed
data, doesn't depend on anything else, and the method you pass is more
like a 'format' method.

johannes