linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] static_call: Handle module init failure correctly in static_call_del

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <87a5gn7sqz.ffs@tglx>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2024 10:00:52 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jinjie Ruan <ruanjinjie@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>, Christophe Leroy
 <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] static_call: Handle module init failure correctly in
 static_call_del_module()

On Wed, Sep 04 2024 at 09:08, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04 2024 at 11:32, Jinjie Ruan wrote:
> So the check must be:
>
> 	if (!static_call_key_has_mods(key))
>         	break;
>
> I missed the module local case completely in my analysis. Can you please
> modify the condition and retest?

That said. This code is pointlessly noisy for the failure case.

Allocation fails are not a reason to warn about. -ENOMEM is propagated
all the way to the caller, so it's sufficient to emit a pr_warn().

Peter?

Thanks,

        tglx
---
--- a/kernel/static_call_inline.c
+++ b/kernel/static_call_inline.c
@@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ static int static_call_module_notify(str
 	case MODULE_STATE_COMING:
 		ret = static_call_add_module(mod);
 		if (ret) {
-			WARN(1, "Failed to allocate memory for static calls");
+			pr_warn("Failed to allocate memory for static calls\n");
 			static_call_del_module(mod);
 		}
 		break;