lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 17/17] module: Prevent module removal racing with text_poke()
From
Date
On 1/17/19 10:07 AM, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> On Jan 16, 2019, at 11:54 PM, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 16:32:59 -0800
>> Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
>>>
>>> It seems dangerous to allow code modifications to take place
>>> concurrently with module unloading. So take the text_mutex while the
>>> memory of the module is freed.
>>
>> At that point, since the module itself is removed from module list,
>> it seems no actual harm. Or would you have any concern?
>
> So it appears that you are right and all the users of text_poke() and
> text_poke_bp() do install module notifiers, and remove the module from their
> internal data structure when they are done (*). As long as they prevent
> text_poke*() to be called concurrently (e.g., using jump_label_lock()),
> everything is fine.
>
> Having said that, the question is whether you “trust” text_poke*() users to
> do so. text_poke() description does not day explicitly that you need to
> prevent modules from being removed.
>
> What do you say?
>

Please make it explicit.

-hpa

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-18 00:46    [W:0.147 / U:4.904 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site