public inbox for b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sven Eckelmann <sven.eckelmann@gmx.de>
To: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org
Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH] batman-adv: Always synchronize rcu's on module shutdown
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 14:07:57 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201009061407.59606.sven.eckelmann@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100906100913.GA13044@Sellars>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 4656 bytes --]

Linus Lüssing wrote:
> Hi Sven,
> 
> synchronize_net already contains a synchronize_rcu at its end, so
> the synchronize_rcu in the batman code there has always been
> redundant.
> 
> I've removed the synchronize_rcu instead of the synchronize_net to
> be on the safe side. I guess usually no more packets should arrive
> anyway as the batman packet type is not registered anymore. But I
> wasn't sure if the might_sleep() of synchronize_net() might be
> needed for something, so I didn't dare to remove synchronize_net.
> 
> If someone says it'd be ok to remove synchronize_net() instead,
> I could make a new patch, no problem.

Ok, it would have been nice to state such things in the commit message 
(otherwise the stable@kernel.org will drop such a patch quite easily). Marek 
and I have ausgekaspert why it only happens in 1765 and also in 1766. So it 
will not be a patch for stable.

And the might_sleep is only for debugging purposes. But yes, it makes sense to 
use synchronize_net here (for example due to the usage of dev_remove_pack 
before).

That means that technically the patch seems to be ok, but didn't liked the 
explanation with the problem that we might have to justify it to the 
stable@kernel.org guys that way.

So I would ack the patch with a minor change in the commit message. So instead 
of

> During the module shutdown procedure in batman_exit(), a rcu callback is
> being scheduled (batman_exit -> hardif_remove_interfaces ->
> hardif_remove_interfae -> call_rcu). However, when the kernel unloads
> the module, the rcu callback might not have been executed yet, resulting
> in a "unable to handle kernel paging request" in __rcu_process_callback
> afterwards, causing the kernel to freeze.
> Therefore, we should always flush all rcu callback functions scheduled
> during the shutdown procedure.

something like

> During the module shutdown procedure in batman_exit(), a rcu callback is                                                                                                                                  
> being scheduled (batman_exit -> hardif_remove_interfaces ->                                                                                                                                               
> hardif_remove_interfae -> call_rcu). However, when the kernel unloads                                                                                                                                     
> the module, the rcu callback might not have been executed yet, resulting                                                                                                                                  
> in a "unable to handle kernel paging request" in __rcu_process_callback                                                                                                                                   
> afterwards, causing the kernel to freeze.                                                                                                                                                                 
                                                                                                                                                                                                          
> The synchronize_net and synchronize_rcu in mesh_free are currently                                                                                                                                        
> called before the call_rcu in hardif_remove_interface and have no real                                                                                                                                    
> effect on it.                                                                                                                                                                                             
                                                                                                                                                                                                          
> Therefore, we should always flush all rcu callback functions scheduled                                                                                                                                    
> during the shutdown procedure using synchronize_net. The call to                                                                                                                                          
> synchronize_rcu can be omitted because synchronize_net already calls it.

thanks,
	Sven

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2010-09-06 12:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-05 23:29 [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCH] batman-adv: Always synchronize rcu's on module shutdown Linus Lüssing
2010-09-06  7:30 ` Sven Eckelmann
2010-09-06 10:09   ` Linus Lüssing
2010-09-06 12:07     ` Sven Eckelmann [this message]
2010-09-06 12:37       ` Linus Lüssing
2010-09-06 12:45         ` [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [PATCHv2] " Sven Eckelmann
2010-09-06 14:09           ` Marek Lindner

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=201009061407.59606.sven.eckelmann@gmx.de \
    --to=sven.eckelmann@gmx.de \
    --cc=b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org \
    /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