From: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
To: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jessica Yu <jeyu@redhat.com>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>, Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 11:36:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a5627cd6-f094-e20d-de63-e94272c33019@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170608164923.mkbiwporqw4i2kxy@treble>
On 06/08/2017 12:49 PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 02:25:24PM -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>> Add three exported API for livepatch modules:
>>
>> void *klp_shadow_attach(void *obj, char *var, gfp_t gfp, void *data);
>> void klp_shadow_detach(void *obj, char *var);
>> void *klp_shadow_get(void *obj, char *var);
>>
>> that implement "shadow" variables, which allow callers to associate new
>> shadow fields to existing data structures.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
>
> Overall the patch looks good to me. It's a simple API but we've found
> it to be very useful for certain patches.
>
> One comment below:
>
>> +void *klp_shadow_attach(void *obj, char *var, gfp_t gfp, void *data)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> + struct klp_shadow *shadow;
>> +
>> + shadow = kmalloc(sizeof(*shadow), gfp);
>> + if (!shadow)
>> + return NULL;
>> +
>> + shadow->obj = obj;
>> +
>> + shadow->var = kstrdup(var, gfp);
>> + if (!shadow->var) {
>> + kfree(shadow);
>> + return NULL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + shadow->data = data;
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&klp_shadow_lock, flags);
>> + hash_add_rcu(klp_shadow_hash, &shadow->node, (unsigned long)obj);
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&klp_shadow_lock, flags);
>> +
>> + return shadow->data;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(klp_shadow_attach);
>
> I wonder if we should worry about people misusing the API by calling
> klp_shadow_attach() for a shadow variable that already exists. Maybe we
> should add a check and return NULL if it already exists.
>
I don't think the API (the shadow or the underlying hash table calls)
currently protects against double-adds... adding a check to do so would
probably need to occur with the klp_shadow_lock to protect against
concurrent detach calls.
I could implement this protection in a v2, or leave it up to the caller.
What do you think?
-- Joe
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-09 15:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-01 18:25 [PATCH 0/3] livepatch: add " Joe Lawrence
2017-06-01 18:25 ` [PATCH 1/3] livepatch: introduce " Joe Lawrence
2017-06-08 16:49 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-06-09 15:36 ` Joe Lawrence [this message]
2017-06-09 18:34 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-06-12 13:49 ` Joe Lawrence
2017-06-14 12:59 ` Petr Mladek
2017-06-14 13:17 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-06-14 14:26 ` Petr Mladek
2017-06-19 16:09 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-06-01 18:25 ` [PATCH 2/3] livepatch: add shadow variable documentation Joe Lawrence
2017-06-14 13:10 ` Petr Mladek
2017-06-01 18:25 ` [PATCH 3/3] livepatch: add shadow variable sample program Joe Lawrence
2017-06-09 18:38 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-06-09 19:05 ` Joe Lawrence
2017-06-13 11:00 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-06-13 17:32 ` Joe Lawrence
2017-06-14 7:45 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-06-14 14:21 ` Petr Mladek
2017-06-14 14:57 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-06-15 10:59 ` Petr Mladek
2017-06-15 13:49 ` Josh Poimboeuf
[not found] ` <20170615143800.d6f5p5bdm4ueecly@redhat.com>
2017-06-15 15:23 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-06-19 16:56 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-06-30 20:32 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2017-07-01 6:53 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-06-14 15:15 ` Joe Lawrence
2017-06-19 16:43 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-06-01 20:05 ` [PATCH 0/3] livepatch: add shadow variable API Jiri Kosina
2017-06-01 20:23 ` Joe Lawrence
2017-06-01 20:32 ` Jiri Kosina
2017-06-13 10:19 ` Miroslav Benes
2017-06-13 17:29 ` Joe Lawrence
2017-06-14 8:02 ` Miroslav Benes
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=a5627cd6-f094-e20d-de63-e94272c33019@redhat.com \
--to=joe.lawrence@redhat.com \
--cc=jeyu@redhat.com \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--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