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 10:35 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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox