[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <35e88dbe-f269-2558-c3b7-9ba228a70504@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 14:53:08 +0200
From: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>
To: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>, <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] initramfs: finish fput() before accessing any binary
from initramfs
On 17/01/17 13:14, Lokesh Vutla wrote:
> commit 4a9d4b024a31 ("switch fput to task_work_add") implements a
> schedule_work() for completing fput(), but did not guarantee calling
> __fput() after unpacking initramfs. Because of this, there is a
> possibility that during boot a driver can see ETXTBSY when it tries
> to load a binary from initramfs as fput() is still pending on that
> binary. This patch makes sure that fput() is completed after unpacking
> initramfs.
Good find there.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>
> ---
>
> - Reproduced on TI K2HK EVM. K2HK Queue Manager subsystem driver[1] tries
> to load a firmware from initramfs during boot. Sometimes loading of this
> firmware fails with error ETXTBSY. Digging a bit more observed that
> deny_write_access() is returning ETXTBSY as inode->i_writecount is > 0
> for that file. This is because Unpacking initramfs does a
> get_write_access(from open) but hasn't done put_write_access(from fput)
> as it hasn't been scheduled yet.
>
> [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/soc/ti/knav_qmss_queue.c
>
> init/initramfs.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/init/initramfs.c b/init/initramfs.c
> index b32ad7d97ac9..c42c69b48a4b 100644
> --- a/init/initramfs.c
> +++ b/init/initramfs.c
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
> #include <linux/dirent.h>
> #include <linux/syscalls.h>
> #include <linux/utime.h>
> +#include <linux/file.h>
>
> static ssize_t __init xwrite(int fd, const char *p, size_t count)
> {
> @@ -652,6 +653,7 @@ static int __init populate_rootfs(void)
> * us a chance to load before device_initcalls.
> */
> load_default_modules();
> + flush_delayed_fput();
Shouldn't the flush be called before the load_default_modules() though?
-Tero
Powered by blists - more mailing lists