> > > diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/patch.c b/kernel/livepatch/patch.c > > > index 5efa262..e79ebb5 100644 > > > --- a/kernel/livepatch/patch.c > > > +++ b/kernel/livepatch/patch.c > > > @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ > > > #include <linux/bug.h> > > > #include <linux/printk.h> > > > #include "patch.h" > > > +#include "transition.h" > > > > > > static LIST_HEAD(klp_ops); > > > > > > @@ -54,15 +55,53 @@ static void notrace klp_ftrace_handler(unsigned long ip, > > > { > > > struct klp_ops *ops; > > > struct klp_func *func; > > > + int patch_state; > > > > > > ops = container_of(fops, struct klp_ops, fops); > > > > > > rcu_read_lock(); > > > + > > > func = list_first_or_null_rcu(&ops->func_stack, struct klp_func, > > > stack_node); > > > - if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!func)) > > > + > > > + if (!func) > > > goto unlock; > > > > Why do you removed the WARN_ON_ONCE(), please? > > > > We still add the function on the stack before registering > > the ftrace handler. Also we unregister the ftrace handler > > before removing the the last entry from the stack. > > > > AFAIK, unregister_ftrace_function() calls rcu_synchronize()' > > to make sure that no-one is inside the handler once finished. > > Mirek knows more about it. > > Hm, this is news to me. Mirek, please share :-) Well, I think the whole thing is well described in emails I exchanged with Steven few months ago. See [1]. [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.LNX.2.00.1608081041060.10833@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > > If this is not true, we have a problem. For example, > > we call kfree(ops) after unregister_ftrace_function(); > > Agreed. TL;DR - we should be ok as long as we do not do crazy things in the handler, deliberate sleeping for example. WARN_ON_ONCE() may be crazy too. I think we discussed it long ago and we came to an agreement to remove it. Miroslav, very slowly going through the patch set -- 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