[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4473a66b-4aee-1d22-aec8-9d6bceb5b303@huawei.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 09:28:43 +0800
From: Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqiang26@...wei.com>
To: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
CC: <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, <kay.sievers@...y.org>,
<clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"wangxiaogang (F)" <wangxiaogang3@...wei.com>,
"Zhoukang (A)" <zhoukang7@...wei.com>,
Mingfangsen <mingfangsen@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module: add usage links when calling ref_module func
On 2019/7/1 21:55, Jessica Yu wrote:
> +++ Zhiqiang Liu [28/06/19 20:32 +0800]:
>> From: Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqiang26@...wei.com>
>>
>> Problem: Users can call ref_module func in their modules to construct
>> relationships with other modules. However, the holders
>> '/sys/module/<mod-name>/holders' of the target module donot include
>> the users` module. So lsmod command misses detailed info of 'Used by'.
>>
>> Here, we will add usage link of a to b's holder_dir.
>>
>> Fixes: 9bea7f239 ("module: fix bne2 "gave up waiting for init of module libcrc32c")
>
> I think we can drop this tag; it doesn't fix a bug specifically
> introduced by that particular commit.
>
Thanks for your reply.
I will remove the Fixes tag in v2 patch.
>> Signed-off-by: Zhiqiang Liu <liuzhiqiang26@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> kernel/module.c | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
>> index 80c7c09584cf..11c6aff37b1f 100644
>> --- a/kernel/module.c
>> +++ b/kernel/module.c
>> @@ -871,6 +871,11 @@ int ref_module(struct module *a, struct module *b)
>> module_put(b);
>> return err;
>> }
>> +
>> + err = sysfs_create_link(b->holders_dir, &a->mkobj.kobj, a->name);
>> + if (err)
>> + return err;
>
> We need to fix the error handling here - the module_use struct
> allocated in the call to add_module_usage() needs to be freed (you
> could just modify add_module_usage() to return the use pointer so that
> it's easier to free from within ref_module()), module_put() needs to
> be called, and the use struct should be removed from its respective
> lists (see module_unload_free()).
>
Thanks again for your advice.
We will modify add_module_usage func to return the use pointer as your suggestion.
In the error handling, We will call module_put() and call list_del() to remove the use.
> Thanks,
>
> Jessica
>
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists