* race in remove_proc_entry()
@ 2006-04-27 14:13 Massimiliano Hofer
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Massimiliano Hofer @ 2006-04-27 14:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Hi,
I found what I think is a nasty behaviour in procfs.
If I create a proc entry and rely on proc_file_read() and proc_file_write() to
hand requests to dp->read_proc and dp->write_proc there is no protection from
removal.
Example:
Process A Process B
proc_file_read()
remove_proc_entry()
kfree(/* whatever was in dp->data */)
dp->read_proc()
read_proc() has no way to know if dp->data has been zeroed or freed since it
was read by proc_file_read(). Process B has no way to know that a read is in
progress.
Of course I can reimplement proc_file_read(), but this makes it pointless in
the first place.
Most proc entries live as long as the kernel or the module that creates them,
so this is a really rare problem, but there are simple precautions that could
prevent it.
We could:
- add a per proc file lock (it could be optional);
- add an optional callback that allows us to perform whatever is needed when
the file is really removed (remove_proc_entry() or de_put()).
The latter would be really simple and would allow for proper completion of
read/write operations with whatever lock and protection is needed inside
dp->data and possibly a simple kfree() performed by the disposal callback
when everyone is really done.
--
Saluti,
Massimiliano Hofer
Nucleus
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2006-04-27 14:14 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-04-27 14:13 race in remove_proc_entry() Massimiliano Hofer
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.