[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200902110006.33132.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:06:31 +1030
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Karsten Keil <kkeil@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
richard kennedy <richard@....demon.co.uk>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>,
dwmw2@...radead.org, Scott Wood <scottwood@...escale.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Suspicious bug in module refcounting
On Tuesday 10 February 2009 21:01:37 Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 10-02-09 13:45:07, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > On Tuesday 10 February 2009 01:48:31 Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > Based on this change, would it make sense to update sys_accept to change
> > > __module_get to try_module_get like in the following patch?
> >
> > I don't think so:
> >
> > > /*
> > > - * We don't need try_module_get here, as the listening socket (sock)
> > > - * has the protocol module (sock->ops->owner) held.
> > > + * Socket's owner cannot be in unloading path because there
> > > + * must be at least one listening reference
> > > */
> > > - __module_get(newsock->ops->owner);
> > > + if (unlikely(!try_module_get(newsock->ops->owner)))
> > > + BUG();
> >
> > rmmod --wait can make try_module_get fail even if the reference count isn't
> > zero.
>
> OK, I though that rmmod --wait waits for refcount==0 and then changes
> the state.
No, it has to stop all future use, otherwise it's useless under load.
Cheers,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists