From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>
To: Jessica Yu <jeyu@redhat.com>
Cc: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
Seth Jennings <sjenning@redhat.com>,
Vojtech Pavlik <vojtech@suse.com>,
Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Fix ordering of ftrace/livepatch calls on module load and unload
Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2016 11:43:57 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1602041142140.22727@cbobk.fhfr.pm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1454375856-27757-1-git-send-email-jeyu@redhat.com>
On Mon, 1 Feb 2016, Jessica Yu wrote:
> As explained here [1], livepatch modules are failing to initialize properly
> because the ftrace coming module notifier (which calls
> ftrace_module_enable()) runs *after* the livepatch module notifier (which
> enables the patch(es)). Thus livepatch attempts to apply patches to
> modules before ftrace_module_enable() is even called for the corresponding
> module(s). As a result, patch modules break. Ftrace code must run before
> livepatch on module load, and the reverse is true on module unload.
>
> For ftrace and livepatch, order of initialization (plus exit/cleanup code)
> is important for loading and unloading modules, and using module notifiers
> to perform this work is not ideal since it is not always clear what gets
> called when. In this patchset, dependence on the module notifier call chain
> is removed in favor of hard coding the corresponding function calls in the
> module loader. This promotes better code visibility and ensures that ftrace
> and livepatch code get called in the correct order on patch module load and
> unload.
>
> Tested the changes with a test livepatch module that patches 9p and nilfs2,
> and verified that the issue described in [1] is fixed.
>
> Patches are based on linux-next.
>
> v1 can be found here -
> http://lkml.kernel.org/g/1454049827-3726-1-git-send-email-jeyu@redhat.com
>
> v2:
> - Instead of splitting the ftrace and livepatch notifiers into coming + going
> notifiers and adjusting their priorities, remove ftrace and livepatch notifiers
> completely and hard-code the necessary function calls in the module loader.
>
> [1] http://lkml.kernel.org/g/20160128204033.GA32131@packer-debian-8-amd64.digitalocean.com
>
>
> Jessica Yu (2):
> ftrace/module: remove ftrace module notifier
> livepatch/module: remove livepatch module notifier
>
> include/linux/ftrace.h | 6 +-
> include/linux/livepatch.h | 9 +++
> kernel/livepatch/core.c | 144 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
> kernel/module.c | 12 ++++
> kernel/trace/ftrace.c | 36 +-----------
Steven, Rusty, what is your word on this please?
These two patches should be merged together, and I'd like to have the
module patching issue Jessica discovered fixed for 4.5 still. IOW, if you
Ack the parts relevant to you (ftrace and module), I'd be willing to take
it to Linus through my tree.
Thanks,
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-04 10:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-02 1:17 [PATCH v2 0/2] Fix ordering of ftrace/livepatch calls on module load and unload Jessica Yu
2016-02-02 1:17 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ftrace/module: remove ftrace module notifier Jessica Yu
2016-02-04 13:27 ` Petr Mladek
2016-02-04 14:18 ` Steven Rostedt
2016-02-04 15:21 ` Petr Mladek
2016-02-04 15:33 ` Steven Rostedt
2016-02-02 1:17 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] livepatch/module: remove livepatch " Jessica Yu
2016-02-04 14:39 ` Petr Mladek
2016-02-04 14:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2016-02-04 16:47 ` Miroslav Benes
2016-02-05 4:11 ` Jessica Yu
2016-02-05 9:15 ` Miroslav Benes
2016-02-05 10:06 ` Petr Mladek
2016-02-08 0:34 ` Rusty Russell
2016-02-04 17:29 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] " Miroslav Benes
2016-02-04 20:55 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2016-02-05 8:59 ` Miroslav Benes
2016-02-04 10:43 ` Jiri Kosina [this message]
2016-02-04 13:29 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Fix ordering of ftrace/livepatch calls on module load and unload Steven Rostedt
2016-02-05 1:17 ` Rusty Russell
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=alpine.LNX.2.00.1602041142140.22727@cbobk.fhfr.pm \
--to=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=jeyu@redhat.com \
--cc=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=live-patching@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mbenes@suse.cz \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=sjenning@redhat.com \
--cc=vojtech@suse.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).