From: Petr Vandrovec <vandrove@vc.cvut.cz>
To: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Patrick Mochel <mochel@osdl.org>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: PCI driver module unload race?
Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 03:33:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030309023343.GA3519@vana.vc.cvut.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030308195117.GE26374@kroah.com>
[Scroll to the end...]
> The case where while probe() is called, the module is unloaded.
> Same thing for remove().
>
> That's all.
>
> > After driver calls pci_unregister_driver,
> > it is sure that there are no other users of this pci driver.
>
> Sure, but that's not the case of what we are protecting here. We want
> pci_unregister_driver() (which is usually called from the module_exit()
Usually! pci_unregister_driver has nothing to do with module_exit(), unless
there is some rule which says that pci_unregister_driver may be called
from module_exit() only.
> function), to not be called if we are in the middle of calling either
> probe() or release().
>
> Do you have a way of protecting the race that is described by Russell
> here that differs from my patch?
There must be normal subsystem locking which prevents you from such race.
Russel King wrote:
> Load PCI driver.
> PCI driver registers using pci_module_init(), and adds itself to sysfs.
> Hot-plugin a PCI device which uses this driver. sysfs matches the PCI
> driver, and calls the PCI drivers probe function.
> The probe function calls kmalloc or some other function which sleeps
> (or gets preempted, if CONFIG_PREEMPT is enabled.)
> We switch to another thread, which happens to be rmmod for this PCI
> driver. We remove the driver since it has a use count of zero.
> We switch back to the PCI driver. Oops.
Both calls to ->probe (& ->remove) must happen under same lock which
is used by pci_(un)register_driver. Driver expects that there is no
device registered after return from pci_unregister_driver, and
your if (try_module_get())... violates this - you simply skip call
to ->remove if module is in unloading state - although I see no reason
why you could not enter driver's ->remove function long before
pci_unregister_driver is called.
Also pci_unregister_driver() expects ->remove to be called for all
registered devices. If you'll guard this call by try_module_get(),
no device will get unregistered from driver, causing memory leaks or
even crashes.
Well, and after reading sysfs code: there is no problem (I would be
really surprised otherwise), as both hotplug event and driver
registration/removal are guarded by bus->subsys.rwsem semaphore,
so pci_unregister_driver() succeeds after previous ->remove
(or ->probe or ...) finishes.
Just make sure that people do not call device_release_driver
unless they really know what they are doing. Proper interface is
bus_remove_device or bus_remove_driver...
Best regards,
Petr Vandrovec
vandrove@vc.cvut.cz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-09 2:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-08 10:47 Russell King
2003-03-08 19:12 ` Greg KH
2003-03-08 19:47 ` Petr Vandrovec
2003-03-08 19:51 ` Greg KH
2003-03-09 2:33 ` Petr Vandrovec [this message]
2003-03-08 20:03 ` Russell King
2003-03-08 20:09 ` Russell King
2003-03-08 20:21 ` Greg KH
2003-03-10 21:44 ` Greg KH
2003-03-10 23:48 ` Oliver Neukum
2003-03-10 23:51 ` Greg KH
2003-03-11 1:04 ` Roman Zippel
2003-03-11 1:15 ` Greg KH
2003-03-11 9:00 ` Oliver Neukum
2003-03-11 15:06 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-03-11 16:07 ` Oliver Neukum
2003-03-16 13:13 ` Rusty Russell
2003-03-11 11:05 ` Roman Zippel
2003-03-11 15:27 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-03-11 20:09 ` Roman Zippel
2003-03-11 19:15 ` Patrick Mochel
2003-03-12 2:28 ` Roman Zippel
2003-03-16 13:05 ` Rusty Russell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030309023343.GA3519@vana.vc.cvut.cz \
--to=vandrove@vc.cvut.cz \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mochel@osdl.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®