linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@profusion.mobi>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jon Masters <jonathan@jonmasters.org>,
	linux-modules <linux-modules@vger.kernel.org>,
	Lucas De Marchi <lucas.de.marchi@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] module: wait when loading a module which is currently initializing.
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 13:37:10 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMOw1v6Qy1wHhRcPQkyhDe7LrGaM_qRdhufr8YtHnfp5pTPFAA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ligdrscn.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>

Hi Rusty,

On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 4:11 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> The original module-init-tools module loader used a fnctl lock on the
> .ko file to avoid attempts to simultaneously load a module.
> Unfortunately, you can't get an exclusive fcntl lock on a read-only
> fd, making this not work for read-only mounted filesystems.
> module-init-tools has a hacky sleep-and-loop for this now.
>
> It's not that hard to wait in the kernel, and only return -EEXIST once
> the first module has finished loading (or continue loading the module
> if the first one failed to initialize for some reason).  It's also
> consistent with what we do for dependent modules which are still loading.
>
> Suggested-by: Lucas De Marchi <lucas.demarchi@profusion.mobi>
> Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
> ---
>  kernel/module.c |   28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
> --- a/kernel/module.c
> +++ b/kernel/module.c
> @@ -2845,6 +2845,20 @@ static int post_relocation(struct module
>         return module_finalize(info->hdr, info->sechdrs, mod);
>  }
>
> +/* Is this module of this name done loading?  No locks held. */
> +static bool finished_loading(const char *name)
> +{
> +       struct module *mod;
> +       bool ret;
> +
> +       mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
> +       mod = find_module(name);
> +       ret = !mod || mod->state != MODULE_STATE_COMING;
> +       mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> +
> +       return ret;
> +}

Much cleaner than we had before :-)

> +
>  /* Allocate and load the module: note that size of section 0 is always
>     zero, and we rely on this for optional sections. */
>  static struct module *load_module(void __user *umod,
> @@ -2852,7 +2866,7 @@ static struct module *load_module(void _
>                                   const char __user *uargs)
>  {
>         struct load_info info = { NULL, };
> -       struct module *mod;
> +       struct module *mod, *old;
>         long err;
>
>         pr_debug("load_module: umod=%p, len=%lu, uargs=%p\n",
> @@ -2918,8 +2932,18 @@ static struct module *load_module(void _
>          * function to insert in a way safe to concurrent readers.
>          * The mutex protects against concurrent writers.
>          */
> +again:
>         mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
> -       if (find_module(mod->name)) {
> +       if ((old = find_module(mod->name)) != NULL) {
> +               if (old->state == MODULE_STATE_COMING) {
> +                       /* Wait in case it fails to load. */
> +                       mutex_unlock(&module_mutex);
> +                       err = wait_event_interruptible(module_wq,
> +                                              finished_loading(mod->name));
> +                       if (err)
> +                               goto free_arch_cleanup;
> +                       goto again;

I wonder if we should indeed retry in case the module failed to load
or if we should just skip straight to returning the error code. We
don't have the return code for the failed load, but maybe we can
fabricate one here.

Thoughts?

cheers,
Lucas De Marchi

  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-14 16:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-14  7:09 [PATCH 1/2] module: fix symbol waiting when module fails before init Rusty Russell
2012-09-14  7:11 ` [PATCH 2/2] module: wait when loading a module which is currently initializing Rusty Russell
2012-09-14 16:37   ` Lucas De Marchi [this message]
2012-09-17  4:36     ` Rusty Russell
2012-09-17 17:37       ` Lucas De Marchi
2012-09-14  7:12 ` module: test code for waiting Rusty Russell
2012-09-14 16:41 ` [PATCH 1/2] module: fix symbol waiting when module fails before init Lucas De Marchi

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=CAMOw1v6Qy1wHhRcPQkyhDe7LrGaM_qRdhufr8YtHnfp5pTPFAA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=lucas.demarchi@profusion.mobi \
    --cc=jonathan@jonmasters.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-modules@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lucas.de.marchi@gmail.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 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).