From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Andrey Tsyvarev <tsyvarev@ispras.ru>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/module.c: Free lock-classes if parse_args failed
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 11:10:30 +1030 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bnlrwsu9.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54BF8439.2000905@ispras.ru>
Andrey Tsyvarev <tsyvarev@ispras.ru> writes:
> 21.01.2015 4:40, Rusty Russell пишет:
>> Andrey Tsyvarev <tsyvarev@ispras.ru> writes:
>>> 20.01.2015 9:37, Rusty Russell пишет:
>>>> Andrey Tsyvarev <tsyvarev@ispras.ru> writes:
>>>>> parse_args call module parameters' .set handlers, which may use locks defined in the module.
>>>>> So, these classes should be freed in case parse_args returns error(e.g. due to incorrect parameter passed).
>>>> Thanks, this seems right. Applied.
>>>>
>>>> But this makes me ask: where is lockdep_free_key_range() called on the
>>>> module init code? It doesn't seem to be at all...
>>> As I understand, locks are not allowed to be defined in the module init
>>> section. So, no needs to call lockdep_free_key_range() for it.
>>> This has a sense: objects from that section are allowed to be used only
>>> by module->init() function. But a single function call doesn't require
>>> any synchronization wrt itself.
>> I don't know that we have any __initdata locks; it would be really
>> weird.
>>
>> But change 'static DEFINE_MUTEX(mutex_param);' to 'static __initdata
>> DEFINE_MUTEX(mutex_param);' to test.
> Compiler warns about sections mismatch, but the test works.
>
> According to lockdep_free_key_range() code, lock class is cleared not
> only according to
> its key(which is equal to lock address in the case of static lock) but
> also according to its name.
What happens if you later register another lock at that address, since
the memory is freed?
A quick grep revealed no __initdata locks in the kernel, so I don't
think we care anyway.
Cheers,
Rusty.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-22 1:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-14 6:25 [PATCH] kernel/module.c: Free lock-classes if parse_args failed Andrey Tsyvarev
2015-01-20 6:37 ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-20 7:47 ` Andrey Tsyvarev
2015-01-21 1:40 ` Rusty Russell
2015-01-21 10:49 ` Andrey Tsyvarev
2015-01-22 0:40 ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2015-01-22 9:27 ` Andrey Tsyvarev
2015-01-20 9:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-19 0:12 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-02-19 11:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-02-19 12:24 ` Ingo Molnar
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=87bnlrwsu9.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tsyvarev@ispras.ru \
/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