From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
adam@yggdrasil.com, jcm@jonmasters.org,
netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Fix (improve) deadlock condition on module removal netfilter socket option removal
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2007 12:33:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46DFD790.6040908@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070905170831.GA25050@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
Neil Horman wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 06, 2007 at 02:13:26AM +1000, Rusty Russell wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 2007-09-05 at 17:22 +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>
>>>But I'm wondering, wouldn't module refcounting alone fix this problem?
>>>If we make nf_sockopt() call try_module_get(ops->owner), remove_module()
>>>on ip_tables.ko would simply fail because the refcount is above zero
>>>(so it would fail at point 3 above). Am I missing something important?
>>
>>Yes, that seems the correct solution to me, too. ISTR that this code
>>predates the current module code.
>>
>>Rusty.
>
>
> Thanks guys-
> When I first started looking at this problem I would have agreed with
> you, that module reference counting alone would fix the problem. However,
> delete_module can work in either a non-blocking or a blocking mode. rmmod
> passes O_NONBLOCK to delete module, and so is fine, but modprobe does not. So
> if you currently use modprobe -r to remove modules (as the iptables service
> script nominally does), modprobe winds up waiting in the kernel for the module
> reference count to become zero. Since we can hold a reference to the module
> being removed in the same path that forks a modprobe request to load that same
> module (which then blocks on the first modprobes fcntl lock), we still get
> deadlock. The way I fixed this was by use of the second patch, which brings
> modprobes behavior into line with the rmmod utility (which is to default to
> non-blocking operation), leading to the remove_module failure and breaking of
> the deadlock that you describe above.
Thanks for the explanation, I've applied your patch.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-06 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-04 20:24 [PATCH 0/2] Fix (improve) deadlock condition on module removal netfilter socket option removal Neil Horman
2007-09-05 15:22 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-09-05 16:13 ` Rusty Russell
2007-09-05 17:08 ` Neil Horman
2007-09-05 17:41 ` Rusty Russell
2007-09-05 18:19 ` Jon Masters
2007-09-05 19:27 ` Neil Horman
2007-09-05 20:17 ` Jon Masters
2007-09-05 20:51 ` Rusty Russell
2007-09-05 20:59 ` Jon Masters
2007-09-05 21:39 ` Jon Masters
2007-09-06 0:17 ` Neil Horman
2007-09-06 12:55 ` Neil Horman
2007-09-06 13:35 ` Jon Masters
2007-09-06 15:40 ` Neil Horman
2007-09-06 10:33 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
2007-09-06 11:08 ` Neil Horman
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=46DFD790.6040908@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=adam@yggdrasil.com \
--cc=jcm@jonmasters.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.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.