All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-scsi <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: module: fix module_refcount() return when running in a module exit routine
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 08:08:21 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1421683701.2080.25.camel@HansenPartnership.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878ugzco8c.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>

On Mon, 2015-01-19 at 16:21 +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com> writes:
> > (2015/01/19 1:55), James Bottomley wrote:
> >> From: James Bottomley <JBottomley@Parallels.com>
> >> 
> >> After e513cc1 module: Remove stop_machine from module unloading,
> >> module_refcount() is returning (unsigned long)-1 when called from within
> >> a routine that runs in module_exit.  This is confusing the scsi device
> >> put code which is coded to detect a module_refcount() of zero for
> >> running within a module exit routine and not try to do another
> >> module_put.  The fix is to restore the original behaviour of
> >> module_refcount() and return zero if we're running inside an exit
> >> routine.
> >> 
> >> Fixes: e513cc1c07e2ab93a4514eec9833e031df3e30bb
> >> Reported-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> >> Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <JBottomley@Parallels.com>
> >> 
> >
> > Yes, this should be fixed as you said, since it must return "unsigned long" value.
> 
> But there are only three non-module callers:
> 
> drivers/scsi/scsi.c:1012:	if (module && module_refcount(module) != 0)
> drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/obdclass/lu_object.c:1359:			LINVRNT(module_refcount(key->lct_owner) > 0);
> include/linux/module.h:447:unsigned long module_refcount(struct module *mod);
> kernel/debug/kdb/kdb_main.c:2026:		kdb_printf("%4ld ", module_refcount(mod));
> kernel/module.c:775:unsigned long module_refcount(struct module *mod)
> kernel/module.c:779:EXPORT_SYMBOL(module_refcount);
> kernel/module.c:859:	seq_printf(m, " %lu ", module_refcount(mod));
> kernel/module.c:911:	return sprintf(buffer, "%lu\n", module_refcount(mk->mod));
> 
> The first one I think should be eliminated, and the second one is simply
> an assertion before calling module_put() (which should probably be
> eliminated).  The others are just printing information.

If you really want to insist on module_reference() returning -1 when the
module is in it's exit phase, OK, but in that case, I think it should
return a signed value, not an unsigned one.

James



  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-01-19 16:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-18 16:55 module: fix module_refcount() return when running in a module exit routine James Bottomley
2015-01-18 23:37 ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-18 23:37   ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-19  5:18 ` Masami Hiramatsu
2015-01-19  5:51   ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-19  8:28     ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-01-19 16:07       ` James Bottomley
2015-01-19 16:08     ` James Bottomley [this message]
2015-01-20  0:45       ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-20  2:17         ` Masami Hiramatsu
2015-01-20 17:23         ` James Bottomley
2015-01-21  5:30           ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-22 16:50           ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-01-22 17:02             ` James Bottomley
2015-01-23  2:54               ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-23 13:17                 ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-01-23 18:42                   ` James Bottomley
2015-01-23 23:35                     ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-26 17:16                     ` Christoph Hellwig
2015-01-28  9:23                     ` Bart Van Assche
2015-01-28 21:45                       ` James Bottomley
2015-01-29 12:16                         ` Bart Van Assche

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=1421683701.2080.25.camel@HansenPartnership.com \
    --to=james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=masami.hiramatsu.pt@hitachi.com \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.