On 11/22/2017 05:29 AM, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> If a task sleeps in a set of patched functions uninterruptedly, it could
> block the whole transition indefinitely. Thus it may be useful to clear
> its TIF_PATCH_PENDING to allow the process to finish.
>
> Admin can do that now by writing to force sysfs attribute in livepatch
> sysfs directory. TIF_PATCH_PENDING is then cleared for all tasks and the
> transition can finish successfully.
>
> Important note! Administrator should not use this feature without a
> clearance from a patch distributor. It must be checked that by doing so
> the consistency model guarantees are not violated. Removal (rmmod) of
> patch modules is permanently disabled when the feature is used. It
> cannot be guaranteed there is no task sleeping in such module.
>
> Signed-off-by: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@xxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-kernel-livepatch | 14 ++++++++++
> Documentation/livepatch/livepatch.txt | 18 ++++++++++--
> kernel/livepatch/core.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++
> kernel/livepatch/transition.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
> kernel/livepatch/transition.h | 1 +
> 5 files changed, 95 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
....
> +
> +/*
> + * Drop TIF_PATCH_PENDING of all tasks on admin's request. This forces an
> + * existing transition to finish.
> + *
> + * NOTE: klp_update_patch_state(task) requires the task to be inactive or
> + * 'current'. This is not the case here and the consistency model could be
> + * broken. Administrator, who is the only one to execute the
> + * klp_force_transitions(), has to be aware of this.
> + */
> +void klp_force_transition(void)
> +{
> + struct task_struct *g, *task;
> + unsigned int cpu;
> +
> + pr_warn("forcing remaining tasks to the patched state\n");
> +
> + read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
> + for_each_process_thread(g, task)
> + klp_update_patch_state(task);
> + read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);
> +
> + for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
> + klp_update_patch_state(idle_task(cpu));
> +
> + klp_forced = true;
> +}
I had a question on this bit. If say cpu 0 executes
klp_force_transition(void), right up until klp_forced is set to true,
and then cpu 1 does klp_complete_transition() (since all threads have
the correct state), wouldn't it be possible then for
klp_complete_transition() to not see klp_forced set to true, and thus
the module could be potentially removed even though it was forced?
If so, I think that the force path just needs to be set before the
threads are updated (as below). I don't think that the
klp_complete_transition() needs the corresponding rmb, b/c there is
sufficient ordering there already (although it would deserve a comment).
Thanks,
-Jason
diff --git a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
index be5bfa5..cca6a3a 100644
--- a/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
+++ b/kernel/livepatch/transition.c
@@ -671,6 +671,15 @@ void klp_force_transition(void)
pr_warn("forcing remaining tasks to the patched state\n");
+ klp_forced = true;
+
+ /*
+ * ensure that if klp_complete_transition() sees that all
+ * the threads have been updated to desired task->patch_state
+ * that we also see klp_forced = true;
+ */
+ smp_wmb();
+
read_lock(&tasklist_lock);
for_each_process_thread(g, task)
klp_update_patch_state(task);
@@ -678,6 +687,4 @@ void klp_force_transition(void)
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
klp_update_patch_state(idle_task(cpu));
-
- klp_forced = true;
}
--
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
