On Fri, 28 Nov 2025 10:27:42 +0800 yebin <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> right before this BUG, don't you? > >> If you reported with that line, it's more easier to understand. > >> > Yes, there is indeed a warning generated. I might not have expressed it > clearly enough. The issue below is related to the problem that occurs > when the second module is unloaded. When the first module was unloaded, > some nodes were left in the hash list, causing a use-after-free (UAF) > issue when traversing the hash list. > Therefore, this patch aims to resolve the UAF problem caused by residual > nodes in the hash list after unloading a module while ftrace is disabled. ftrace_disabled is equivalent to BUG(). But it doesn't crash the system immediately, but requires a reboot ASAP. I'm not interested in fixing residual bugs that happen because of a ftrace_disabled was triggered. The ftrace_disabled triggering is the cause of this. It should *never* happen. If it does, it needs to be fixed. Let's focus our attention on fixing the cause of ftrace_disabled. Anything else is just waste of effort. Do you have the output of the first warning when ftrace_disabled was triggered? -- Steve
