Date:	Wed, 24 Jun 2009 15:45:39 -0400
From:	Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
To:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	dhowells@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] slow-work: add (module*)work->owner to fix races
 with module clients

Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Gregory Haskins wrote:
>   
>> (Applies to Linus' git master:626f380d)
>>
>> Hi All,
>>   I found this while working on KVM.  I actually posted this patch with
>> a KVM
>> series yesterday and standalone earlier today, but neither seems to have
>> made it to the lists.  I suspect there is an issue with git-mail/postfix
>> on my system.
>>
>> I digress. This is a repost with the patch by itself, and rebased to
>> Linus' tree instead of kvm.git.  Apologies if the system finally
>> corrects itself and the others show up.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>> Regards,
>> -Greg
>>
>> -----------------------------
>>
>> slow-work: add (module*)work->owner to fix races with module clients
>>
>> The slow_work facility was designed to use reference counting instead of
>> barriers for synchronization.  The reference counting mechanism is
>> implemented as a vtable op (->get_ref, ->put_ref) callback.  This is
>> problematic for module use of the slow_work facility because it is
>> impossible
>> to synchronize against the .text installed in the callbacks: There is
>> no way to ensure that the slow-work threads have completely exited the
>> .text in question and rmmod may yank it out from under the slow_work thread.
>>
>> This patch attempts to address this issue by transparently mapping "struct
>> module* owner" to the slow_work item, and maintaining a module reference
>> count coincident with the more externally visible reference count.  Since
>> the slow_work facility is resident in kernel, it should be a race-free
>> location to issue a module_put() call.  This will ensure that modules
>> can properly cleanup before exiting.
>>
>> A module_get()/module_put() pair on slow_work_enqueue() and the subsequent
>> dequeue technically adds the overhead of the atomic operations for every
>> work item scheduled.  However, slow_work is designed for deferring
>> relatively long-running and/or sleepy tasks to begin with, so this
>> overhead will hopefully be negligible.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
>> CC: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
>> ---
>>
>>  include/linux/slow-work.h |    4 ++++
>>  kernel/slow-work.c        |    6 ++++++
>>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/slow-work.h b/include/linux/slow-work.h
>> index b65c888..9f48dab 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/slow-work.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/slow-work.h
>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
>>  #ifdef CONFIG_SLOW_WORK
>>  
>>  #include <linux/sysctl.h>
>> +#include <linux/module.h>
>>  
>>  struct slow_work;
>>  
>> @@ -42,6 +43,7 @@ struct slow_work_ops {
>>   *   queued
>>   */
>>  struct slow_work {
>> +    struct module          *owner;
>>      unsigned long        flags;
>>  #define SLOW_WORK_PENDING    0    /* item pending (further) execution */
>>  #define SLOW_WORK_EXECUTING    1    /* item currently executing */
>> @@ -61,6 +63,7 @@ struct slow_work {
>>  static inline void slow_work_init(struct slow_work *work,
>>                    const struct slow_work_ops *ops)
>>  {
>> +    work->owner = THIS_MODULE;
>>      work->flags = 0;
>>      work->ops = ops;
>>      INIT_LIST_HEAD(&work->link);
>> @@ -78,6 +81,7 @@ static inline void slow_work_init(struct slow_work *work,
>>  static inline void vslow_work_init(struct slow_work *work,
>>                     const struct slow_work_ops *ops)
>>  {
>> +    work->owner = THIS_MODULE;
>>      work->flags = 1 << SLOW_WORK_VERY_SLOW;
>>      work->ops = ops;
>>      INIT_LIST_HEAD(&work->link);
>> diff --git a/kernel/slow-work.c b/kernel/slow-work.c
>> index 09d7519..1dc3486 100644
>> --- a/kernel/slow-work.c
>> +++ b/kernel/slow-work.c
>> @@ -220,6 +220,8 @@ static bool slow_work_execute(void)
>>      }
>>  
>>      work->ops->put_ref(work);
>>   
>>     
>
> On this front: I also wonder if this put_ref is racing since we cannot
> guarantee pointer stability if
> the object is kfree'd as a result of dropping the last ref.  I do not
> know enough about compilers to say whether work or work->ops
> invalidation would cause problems with the call-return, but it seems
> dangerous at best.  An alternative might be to copy the put_ref pointer
> prior to the call.  Something like
>
>     slowwork_putref_t put_ref = work->ops->put_ref;
>     ....
>     put_ref(work);
>
> might be better.  However, I am not sure if it really matters so I did
> not address this issue yet.
>
> -Greg
>
>
>   
>> +    barrier(); /* ensure that put_ref is not re-ordered with module_put */
>> +    module_put(work->owner);
>>     

Ugg..speaking of using invalidated pointers!  I need to cache "owner"
here as well.

-Greg
>>      return true;
>>  
>>  auto_requeue:
>> @@ -299,6 +301,8 @@ int slow_work_enqueue(struct slow_work *work)
>>          if (test_bit(SLOW_WORK_EXECUTING, &work->flags)) {
>>              set_bit(SLOW_WORK_ENQ_DEFERRED, &work->flags);
>>          } else {
>> +            if (!try_module_get(work->owner))
>> +                goto cant_get_mod;
>>              if (work->ops->get_ref(work) < 0)
>>                  goto cant_get_ref;
>>              if (test_bit(SLOW_WORK_VERY_SLOW, &work->flags))
>> @@ -313,6 +317,8 @@ int slow_work_enqueue(struct slow_work *work)
>>      return 0;
>>  
>>  cant_get_ref:
>> +    module_put(work->owner);
>> +cant_get_mod:
>>      spin_unlock_irqrestore(&slow_work_queue_lock, flags);
>>      return -EAGAIN;
>>  }
>>
>>
>>   
>>     
>
>
>   



Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (267 bytes)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists