Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1662560
| From | Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API |
| Date | 2017-06-09 17:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tQub0-3k4-25@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <tND17-68x-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <tND18-68x-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <tQ8Nc-6HE-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | Red Hat |
On 06/08/2017 12:49 PM, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 02:25:24PM -0400, Joe Lawrence wrote:
>> Add three exported API for livepatch modules:
>>
>> void *klp_shadow_attach(void *obj, char *var, gfp_t gfp, void *data);
>> void klp_shadow_detach(void *obj, char *var);
>> void *klp_shadow_get(void *obj, char *var);
>>
>> that implement "shadow" variables, which allow callers to associate new
>> shadow fields to existing data structures.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com>
>
> Overall the patch looks good to me. It's a simple API but we've found
> it to be very useful for certain patches.
>
> One comment below:
>
>> +void *klp_shadow_attach(void *obj, char *var, gfp_t gfp, void *data)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long flags;
>> + struct klp_shadow *shadow;
>> +
>> + shadow = kmalloc(sizeof(*shadow), gfp);
>> + if (!shadow)
>> + return NULL;
>> +
>> + shadow->obj = obj;
>> +
>> + shadow->var = kstrdup(var, gfp);
>> + if (!shadow->var) {
>> + kfree(shadow);
>> + return NULL;
>> + }
>> +
>> + shadow->data = data;
>> +
>> + spin_lock_irqsave(&klp_shadow_lock, flags);
>> + hash_add_rcu(klp_shadow_hash, &shadow->node, (unsigned long)obj);
>> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&klp_shadow_lock, flags);
>> +
>> + return shadow->data;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(klp_shadow_attach);
>
> I wonder if we should worry about people misusing the API by calling
> klp_shadow_attach() for a shadow variable that already exists. Maybe we
> should add a check and return NULL if it already exists.
>
I don't think the API (the shadow or the underlying hash table calls)
currently protects against double-adds... adding a check to do so would
probably need to occur with the klp_shadow_lock to protect against
concurrent detach calls.
I could implement this protection in a v2, or leave it up to the caller.
What do you think?
-- Joe
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 1/3] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-06-08 18:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com> - 2017-06-09 17:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> - 2017-06-09 20:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 1/3] livepatch: introduce shadow variable API Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence@redhat.com> - 2017-06-12 15:50 +0200
csiph-web