From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Milan Broz <mbroz@redhat.com>
Cc: device-mapper development <dm-devel@redhat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
containers@lists.osdl.org
Subject: Re: [dm-devel] clone() with CLONE_NEWNET breaks kobject_uevent_env()
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2011 11:39:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1vctt2qlj.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E4E503B.3050406@redhat.com> (Milan Broz's message of "Fri, 19 Aug 2011 13:59:55 +0200")
Milan Broz <mbroz@redhat.com> writes:
> On 08/19/2011 01:43 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Milan Broz <mbroz@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 08/19/2011 11:13 AM, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>>> Milan Broz <mbroz@redhat.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> I think the proper fix is to remove the error return from
>>>> kobject_uevent_env and kobject_uevent, and make it harder to get calling
>>>> of this function wrong. Possibly in conjunction with that tag all of
>>>> the memory allocations of kobject_uevent_env with GFP_NOFAIL or
>>>> something so the memory allocator knows that this path is totally
>>>> not able to deal with failure.
>>>>
>>>> Is kobject_uevent_env anything except an asynchronous best effort
>>>> notification to user-space that a device has come or gone?
>>>
>>> Unfortunately it is for device-mapper. libdevmapper
>>> depends on information that uevent was sent because udev rules uses
>>> semaphore to inform that some action was taken.
>>> So if dm-ioctl returns flag that uevent was not sent, it fallback
>>> to different error path (otherwise it waits for completion forever).
>>> (TBH I am more and more convinced this was not quite clever concept.)
>>
>> If I understand your description and the code right the guarantee that
>> you need is that kobject_uevent will return success only if it has
>> queued a packet in every listening netlink socket.
>
> I think so. IOW success == event was sent to all active listeners.
>
>> We already ignore ENOBUFS so the guarantee you appear to need in
>> libdevmapper does not appear to be present in kobject_uevent.
>>
>> Does the libdevmapper code work despite getting a spurious failure?
>
> BTW I do not see ENOBUFS but ESRCH (from netlink_broadcast_filtered).
>
> If spurious failure is that event is sent (even partially) but it reports
> failure, it is the exact situation I see now - libdevmapper will try
> to decrement system semaphore which is already removed from udev rules.
>
> Final state is correct, just it prints ugly warnings. IOW it recovers
> from this situation correctly.
Then I guess this is fixable in kobject_uevent_env. I'm not certain
it is smart to support this case but it appears supportable.
> But Kay's suggestion to use netlink_has_listeners() seems like good
> idea. IOW if there is no listener, it should skip quietly and not
> fail the whole call...
In the case of ESRCH I completely agree.
We are currently ignoring errors in the semantically more interesting
case when netlink_broadcast does not deliver the packet to one of the
listening netlink sockets.
How does this patch look?
---
diff --git a/lib/kobject_uevent.c b/lib/kobject_uevent.c
index 70af0a7..7da5ef3 100644
--- a/lib/kobject_uevent.c
+++ b/lib/kobject_uevent.c
@@ -139,6 +139,7 @@ int kobject_uevent_env(struct kobject *kobj, enum kobject_action action,
u64 seq;
int i = 0;
int retval = 0;
+ bool delivery_failed;
#ifdef CONFIG_NET
struct uevent_sock *ue_sk;
#endif
@@ -251,6 +252,7 @@ int kobject_uevent_env(struct kobject *kobj, enum kobject_action action,
if (retval)
goto exit;
+ delivery_failure = false;
#if defined(CONFIG_NET)
/* send netlink message */
mutex_lock(&uevent_sock_mutex);
@@ -281,14 +283,15 @@ int kobject_uevent_env(struct kobject *kobj, enum kobject_action action,
0, 1, GFP_KERNEL,
kobj_bcast_filter,
kobj);
- /* ENOBUFS should be handled in userspace */
- if (retval == -ENOBUFS)
- retval = 0;
+ if (retval && (retval != -ESRCH))
+ delivery_failure = true;
} else
- retval = -ENOMEM;
+ delivery_failure = true;
}
mutex_unlock(&uevent_sock_mutex);
#endif
+ if (delivery_failure)
+ retval = -ENOBUFS;
/* call uevent_helper, usually only enabled during early boot */
if (uevent_helper[0] && !kobj_usermode_filter(kobj)) {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-19 18:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4E4CDF44.5080109@redhat.com>
2011-08-19 7:52 ` clone() with CLONE_NEWNET breaks kobject_uevent_env() Milan Broz
[not found] ` <m17h69sr03.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
2011-08-19 10:22 ` [dm-devel] " Milan Broz
2011-08-19 11:43 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-08-19 11:59 ` Milan Broz
2011-08-19 18:39 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2011-08-19 20:41 ` Milan Broz
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=m1vctt2qlj.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=containers@lists.osdl.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=kay.sievers@vrfy.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbroz@redhat.com \
/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