From: Rusty Russell <rusty@au1.ibm.com>
To: vatsa@in.ibm.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org
Subject: Re: Module Observations
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 16:02:28 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040103160228.4692b373.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040102185509.A18154@in.ibm.com>
On Fri, 2 Jan 2004 18:55:09 +0530
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@in.ibm.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I was going thr' module code and made some observations:
>
> 1. sys_init_module drops the module_mutex semaphore
> before calling mod->init() function and later
> reacquires it. After reacquiring, it marks
> the module state as MODULE_STATE_LIVE.
>
> In the window when mod->init() function is running,
> isn't it possible that sys_delete_module (running
> on some other CPU and trying to remove the _same_ module)
> acquires the module_mutex sem and marks the module
> state as MODULE_STATE_GOING?
>
> Shouldn't sys_init_module check for
> that possibility when it reacquires the semaphore after
> calling mod->init function?
Good catch. The module removal should refuse to remove it without --force.
I opened this hole when I dropped the sem around mod->init() (because
some modules load other modules in their init routine).
Andrew, please apply patch below.
> 2. try_module_get() and module_put()
>
> try_module_get increments the local cpu's ref count for the module
> and module_put decrements it.
>
> Is it required that the caller call both these functions from the same CPU?
> Otherwise, the total refcount for the module will be non-zero!
No, it's OK. We only care about the *total* being zero.
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too
many doers quoting their contemporaries. -- Larry McVoy
Name: Prevent Removal of Module During Init
Author: Rusty Russell
Status: Trivial
D: Vatsa spotted this: you can remove a module while it's being
D: initialized, and that will be bad. Hole was opened when I dropped
D: the sem around the init routine (which can probe for other
D: modules).
diff -urpN --exclude TAGS -X /home/rusty/devel/kernel/kernel-patches/current-dontdiff --minimal .22325-linux-2.6.1-rc1/kernel/module.c .22325-linux-2.6.1-rc1.updated/kernel/module.c
--- .22325-linux-2.6.1-rc1/kernel/module.c 2003-11-24 15:42:33.000000000 +1100
+++ .22325-linux-2.6.1-rc1.updated/kernel/module.c 2004-01-03 15:59:54.000000000 +1100
@@ -687,8 +687,8 @@ sys_delete_module(const char __user *nam
goto out;
}
- /* Already dying? */
- if (mod->state == MODULE_STATE_GOING) {
+ /* Doing init or already dying? */
+ if (mod->state != MODULE_STATE_LIVE) {
/* FIXME: if (force), slam module count and wake up
waiter --RR */
DEBUGP("%s already dying\n", mod->name);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-01-04 9:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-01-02 13:25 Srivatsa Vaddagiri
2004-01-03 5:02 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2004-03-29 15:42 ` 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=20040103160228.4692b373.rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
/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
Powered by JetHome