mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@huawei.com>
Cc: <vvs@virtuozzo.com>, <adobriyan@sw.ru>, <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
	<tglx@linutronix.de>, <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	<mingo@kernel.org>, <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, <luto@kernel.org>,
	<arjan@linux.intel.com>, <Nadia.Derbey@bull.net>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	<stern@rowland.harvard.edu>, <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	<masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>, <alex.huangjianhui@huawei.com>,
	<dylix.dailei@huawei.com>,
	Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@parallels.com>,
	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/notifier.c: remove notifier_chain_register
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2019 12:38:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190613123823.bf75e7305e22dd1dcab04fb8@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1560434864-98664-1-git-send-email-nixiaoming@huawei.com>

On Thu, 13 Jun 2019 22:07:44 +0800 Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@huawei.com> wrote:

> Registering the same notifier to a hook repeatedly can cause the hook
> list to form a ring or lose other members of the list.
> 
> case1: An infinite loop in notifier_chain_register can cause soft lockup
> 	atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test_notifier1);
> 	atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test_notifier1);
> 	atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test_notifier2);
> 
> case2: An infinite loop in notifier_chain_register can cause soft lockup
> 	atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test_notifier1);
> 	atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test_notifier1);
> 	atomic_notifier_call_chain(&test_notifier_list, 0, NULL);
> 
> case3: lose other hook "test_notifier2"
> 	atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test_notifier1);
> 	atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test_notifier2);
> 	atomic_notifier_chain_register(&test_notifier_list, &test_notifier1);
> 
> case4: Unregister returns 0, but the hook is still in the linked list,
> 	and it is not really registered. If you call notifier_call_chain
> 	after ko is unloaded, it will trigger oops.
> 
> If the system is configured with softlockup_panic and the same
> hook is repeatedly registered on the panic_notifier_list, it
> will cause a loop panic.
> 
> The only difference between notifier_chain_cond_register and
> notifier_chain_register is that a check is added in order to
> avoid registering the same notifier multiple times to the same hook.
> So consider removing notifier_chain_register and replacing it
> with notifier_chain_cond_register.
>
> ...
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/notifier.c b/kernel/notifier.c
> index d9f5081..56efd54 100644
> --- a/kernel/notifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/notifier.c
> @@ -19,20 +19,6 @@
>   *	are layered on top of these, with appropriate locking added.
>   */
>  
> -static int notifier_chain_register(struct notifier_block **nl,
> -		struct notifier_block *n)
> -{
> -	while ((*nl) != NULL) {
> -		WARN_ONCE(((*nl) == n), "double register detected");
> -		if (n->priority > (*nl)->priority)
> -			break;
> -		nl = &((*nl)->next);
> -	}
> -	n->next = *nl;
> -	rcu_assign_pointer(*nl, n);
> -	return 0;
> -}

Registering an already-registered notifier is a bug (except for in
net/sunrpc/rpc_pipe.c, apparently).  The effect of this change is to
remove the warning about the presence of the bug, so the bug is less
likely to get fixed.

I think it would be better to remove notifier_chain_cond_register() and
blocking_notifier_chain_cond_register() and to figure out why
net/sunrpc/rpc_pipe.c is using it and to redo the rpc code so it no
longer has that need.


  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-13 19:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-13 14:07 Xiaoming Ni
2019-06-13 19:38 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2019-06-16 13:56   ` Nixiaoming

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=20190613123823.bf75e7305e22dd1dcab04fb8@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=Nadia.Derbey@bull.net \
    --cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
    --cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
    --cc=adobriyan@sw.ru \
    --cc=alex.huangjianhui@huawei.com \
    --cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dylix.dailei@huawei.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luto@kernel.org \
    --cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=nixiaoming@huawei.com \
    --cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=skinsbursky@parallels.com \
    --cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
    --cc=vvs@virtuozzo.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®