On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 08:17:36PM -0500, Jessica Yu wrote:
> > Remove the livepatch module notifier in favor of directly enabling and
> > disabling patches to modules in the module loader. Hard-coding the
> > function calls ensures that ftrace_module_enable() is run before
> > klp_module_enable() during module load, and that klp_module_disable() is
> > run before ftrace_release_mod() during module unload. This way, ftrace
> > and livepatch code is run in the correct order during the module
> > load/unload sequence without dependence on the module notifier call chain.
> >
> > This fixes a notifier ordering issue in which the ftrace module notifier
> > (and hence ftrace_module_enable()) for coming modules was being called
> > after klp_module_notify(), which caused livepatch modules to initialize
> > incorrectly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jessica Yu <jeyu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/linux/livepatch.h | 9 +++
> > kernel/livepatch/core.c | 144 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> > kernel/module.c | 8 +++
> > 3 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 75 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/livepatch.h b/include/linux/livepatch.h
> > index a882865..fdd5f1c 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/livepatch.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/livepatch.h
> > @@ -134,6 +134,15 @@ int klp_unregister_patch(struct klp_patch *);
> > int klp_enable_patch(struct klp_patch *);
> > int klp_disable_patch(struct klp_patch *);
> >
> > +/* Called from the module loader during module coming/going states */
> > +extern int klp_module_enable(struct module *mod);
> > +extern void klp_module_disable(struct module *mod);
> > +
> > +#else /* !CONFIG_LIVEPATCH */
> > +
> > +static inline int klp_module_enable(struct module *mod) { return 0; }
> > +static inline void klp_module_disable(struct module *mod) { }
> > +
> > #endif /* CONFIG_LIVEPATCH */
> >
> > #endif /* _LINUX_LIVEPATCH_H_ */
> > diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/core.c b/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> > index bc2c85c..7aa975d 100644
> > --- a/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> > +++ b/kernel/livepatch/core.c
> > @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ static void klp_find_object_module(struct klp_object *obj)
> > */
> > mod = find_module(obj->name);
> > /*
> > - * Do not mess work of the module coming and going notifiers.
> > + * Do not mess work of the klp module coming and going handlers.
> > * Note that the patch might still be needed before the going handler
> > * is called. Module functions can be called even in the GOING state
> > * until mod->exit() finishes. This is especially important for
> > @@ -866,103 +866,107 @@ int klp_register_patch(struct klp_patch *patch)
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(klp_register_patch);
> >
> > -static int klp_module_notify_coming(struct klp_patch *patch,
> > - struct klp_object *obj)
> > +/* Called when module state is MODULE_STATE_COMING */
> > +int klp_module_enable(struct module *mod)
>
> I think this function name was originally my idea. But now I'm thinking
> it could cause some confusion with the similarly named
> klp_enable_object().
>
> How about naming it klp_module_coming()? That more accurately describes
> its purpose IMO and it would also make the comment above it no longer
> necessary.
>
> And similarly we could rename klp_module_disable() ->
> klp_module_going().
I agree. klp_module_{coming,going} is better.
Miroslav
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe live-patching" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
