mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nicolai Stange <nstange@suse.de>
To: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Nicolai Stange <nstange@suse.de>,
	live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
	Jessica Yu <jeyu@redhat.com>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
	Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API
Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2017 16:46:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87378pgcha.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5f769d8c-f539-ebdc-359b-ef42dc7c019b@redhat.com> (Joe Lawrence's message of "Fri, 18 Aug 2017 10:19:54 -0400")

Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com> writes:

> On 08/18/2017 10:04 AM, Petr Mladek wrote:
>> On Fri 2017-08-18 15:44:29, Nicolai Stange wrote:
>>> Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>> +
>>>> +/**
>>>> + * klp_shadow_get() - retrieve a shadow variable data pointer
>>>> + * @obj:	pointer to parent object
>>>> + * @id:		data identifier
>>>> + *
>>>> + * Return: the shadow variable data element, NULL on failure.
>>>> + */
>>>> +void *klp_shadow_get(void *obj, unsigned long id)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct klp_shadow *shadow;
>>>> +
>>>> +	rcu_read_lock();
>>>> +
>>>> +	hash_for_each_possible_rcu(klp_shadow_hash, shadow, node,
>>>> +				   (unsigned long)obj) {
>>>> +
>>>> +		if (klp_shadow_match(shadow, obj, id)) {
>>>> +			rcu_read_unlock();
>>>> +			return shadow->data;
>>>
>>> I had to think a moment about what protects shadow from getting freed by
>>> a concurrent detach after that rcu_read_unlock(). Then I noticed that if
>>> obj and the livepatch are alive, then so is shadow, because there
>>> obviously hasn't been any reason to detach it.
>>>
>>> So maybe it would be nice to have an additional comment at
>>> klp_shadow_detach() that it's the API user's responsibility not to use a
>>> shadow instance after detaching it...
>
> Nicolai, I can add something like "This function releases the memory for
> this shadow variable instance, callers should stop referencing it
> accordingly."  Similar text for klp_shadow_detach_all().

Perfect, thanks!


>> Good point. In fact, it might make sense to rename the functions:
>> 
>>      attach -> create
>>      detach -> destroy
>> 
>> The name detach suggests that the variable is just not connected to
>> the parent object but that it is still accessible/usable.
>
> FWIW, kpatch calls them "kpatch_shadow_alloc" and "kpatch_shadow_free".
> Now that it's clear that we're not going separate shadow variable
> allocation from hash table insertion, going back to alloc/create and
> destroy/free is fine w/me.

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)

      reply	other threads:[~2017-08-18 14:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-08-14 20:02 [PATCH v4] livepatch: shadow variables Joe Lawrence
2017-08-14 20:02 ` [PATCH v4] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API Joe Lawrence
2017-08-15 13:59   ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-08-16 12:43   ` Miroslav Benes
2017-08-16 13:40     ` Joe Lawrence
2017-08-31 12:45       ` Miroslav Benes
2017-08-17 14:05   ` Petr Mladek
2017-08-17 16:01     ` Joe Lawrence
2017-08-17 16:28       ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-08-18  9:42       ` Petr Mladek
2017-08-18 19:04         ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-08-18 13:46     ` Joe Lawrence
2017-08-18 16:18       ` Petr Mladek
2017-08-18 20:25     ` Joe Lawrence
2017-08-21 11:24       ` Petr Mladek
2017-08-18 13:44   ` Nicolai Stange
2017-08-18 14:04     ` Petr Mladek
2017-08-18 14:19       ` Joe Lawrence
2017-08-18 14:46         ` Nicolai Stange [this message]

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=87378pgcha.fsf@suse.de \
    --to=nstange@suse.de \
    --cc=jeyu@redhat.com \
    --cc=jikos@kernel.org \
    --cc=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
    --cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
    --cc=pmladek@suse.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