LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@openvz.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
duncan.sands@math.u-psud.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] Fix rmmod/read/write races in /proc entries
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 19:16:27 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070213161627.GC6036@localhost.sw.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070212223552.59d733b1.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Mon, Feb 12, 2007 at 10:35:52PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 23:23:30 +0300 Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > [PATCH v4] Fix rmmod/read/write races in /proc entries
>
> This:
>
> static ssize_t
> proc_file_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buffer,
> size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> {
> struct inode *inode = file->f_path.dentry->d_inode;
> struct proc_dir_entry * dp;
> ssize_t rv = -EIO;
>
> dp = PDE(inode);
>
> if (!dp->write_proc)
> goto out;
>
> spin_lock(&dp->pde_unload_lock);
> if (!dp->proc_fops)
> /*
> * remove_proc_entry() marked PDE as "going away".
> * No new writers allowed.
> */
> goto out_unlock;
>
> versus
>
> spin_lock(&de->pde_unload_lock);
> /*
> * Stop accepting new readers/writers. If you're dynamically
> * allocating ->proc_fops, save a pointer somewhere.
> */
> de->proc_fops = NULL;
> /* Wait until all existing readers/writers are done. */
> if (de->pde_users > 0) {
> struct completion c;
>
> init_completion(&c);
> if (!de->pde_unload_completion)
> de->pde_unload_completion = &c;
>
> spin_unlock(&de->pde_unload_lock);
> spin_unlock(&proc_subdir_lock);
>
> wait_for_completion(de->pde_unload_completion);
>
> spin_lock(&proc_subdir_lock);
> goto continue_removing;
> }
> spin_unlock(&de->pde_unload_lock);
> <here>
> ...
> <free de>
>
> What prevents proc_file_write() from looking up and playing with this de in
> <here>?
If I understood your two-column diagram correctly, scenario below can't
happen because of PDE's own refcount (->count) and existence of
->deleted (0/1)
remove_proc_entry() sees positive ->count and doesn't immediately free
PDE. remove_proc_entry() will at most a) lock b) access to check
->proc_fops which is NULL now, and c) unlock which is fine because
memory is in place.
->count is bumped in proc_get_inode after checking PDEs lists, but our
PDE was already removed from it.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-02-13 16:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-02-08 13:20 [PATCH v3] " Alexey Dobriyan
2007-02-09 9:00 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-11 20:23 ` [PATCH v4] " Alexey Dobriyan
2007-02-11 20:34 ` Al Viro
2007-02-13 6:35 ` Andrew Morton
2007-02-13 16:16 ` Alexey Dobriyan [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070213161627.GC6036@localhost.sw.ru \
--to=adobriyan@openvz.org \
--cc=adobriyan@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=duncan.sands@math.u-psud.fr \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viro@ftp.linux.org.uk \
--subject='Re: [PATCH v4] Fix rmmod/read/write races in /proc entries' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).