2007-08-12 15:17:14

by Mathieu Desnoyers

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [patch 2/2] Sort module list by pointer address to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators

A race that appears both in /proc/modules and in kallsyms: if, between the
seq file reads, the process is put to sleep and at this moment a module is
or removed from the module list, the listing will skip an amount of
modules/symbols corresponding to the amount of elements present in the unloaded
module, but at the current position in the list if the iteration is located
after the removed module.

The cleanest way I found to deal with this problem is to sort the module list.
We can then keep the old struct module * as the old iterator, knowing the it may
be removed between the seq file reads, but we only use it as "get next". If it
is not present in the module list, the next pointer will be used.

By doing this, removing a given module will now only fuzz the output related to
this specific module, not any random module anymore. Since modprobe uses
/proc/modules, it might be important to make sure multiple concurrent running
modprobes won't interfere with each other.

Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]>
---
kernel/module.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/module.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/kernel/module.c 2007-08-12 10:05:39.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/module.c 2007-08-12 10:22:05.000000000 -0400
@@ -63,8 +63,10 @@ extern int module_sysfs_initialized;
/* If this is set, the section belongs in the init part of the module */
#define INIT_OFFSET_MASK (1UL << (BITS_PER_LONG-1))

-/* List of modules, protected by module_mutex or preempt_disable
- * (add/delete uses stop_machine). */
+/*
+ * List of modules, protected by module_mutex or preempt_disable
+ * (add/delete uses stop_machine). Sorted by ascending list node address.
+ */
DEFINE_MUTEX(module_mutex);
LIST_HEAD(modules);
static DECLARE_MUTEX(notify_mutex);
@@ -2134,10 +2136,24 @@ nomodsectinfo:
/*
* link the module with the whole machine is stopped with interrupts off
* - this defends against kallsyms not taking locks
+ * We sort the modules by struct module pointer address to permit correct
+ * iteration over modules of, at least, kallsyms for preemptible operations,
+ * such as read(). Sorting by struct module pointer address is equivalent to
+ * sort by list node address.
*/
static int __link_module(void *_mod)
{
- struct module *mod = _mod;
+ struct module *mod = _mod, *iter;
+
+ list_for_each_entry_reverse(iter, &modules, list) {
+ BUG_ON(iter == mod); /* Should never be in the list twice */
+ if (iter < mod) {
+ /* We belong to the location right after iter. */
+ list_add(&mod->list, &iter->list);
+ return 0;
+ }
+ }
+ /* We should be added at the head of the list */
list_add(&mod->list, &modules);
return 0;
}
@@ -2402,12 +2418,14 @@ unsigned long module_kallsyms_lookup_nam
static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
{
mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
- return seq_list_start(&modules, *pos);
+ if (!*pos)
+ m->private = NULL;
+ return seq_sorted_list_start(&modules, m->private);
}

static void *m_next(struct seq_file *m, void *p, loff_t *pos)
{
- return seq_list_next(p, &modules, pos);
+ return seq_sorted_list_next(p, &modules, &m->private);
}

static void m_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *p)

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68


2007-08-15 03:40:06

by Wu Fengguang

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Sort module list by pointer address to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators

On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 11:08:46AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> static void *m_next(struct seq_file *m, void *p, loff_t *pos)
> {
> - return seq_list_next(p, &modules, pos);
> + return seq_sorted_list_next(p, &modules, &m->private);
> }

In theory it is not safe to use something other than the passed in
*pos as an position indicator. Because seq_file do not always call
->next() to advance to the next item. Look at seq_file.c, it sometimes
increase the pos/index directly! Which also prevents pos to skip
forward, which is preferred in your case.

The attached patch tries to fix it.

The seq_file.c is so twisted!

Fengguang
===

seqfile: remove seq_file's assumption about iterators

The seq_file implementation has some hardcoded index++/pos++ lines,
which assumes iterators to be *continuous* integers.

This patch replaces the index++ lines with calls to m->next(), so that
seq_file users can freely use discrete forms of iterators, such as
ascending addresses.

Cc: Randy Dunlap <[email protected]>
Cc: Martin Bligh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Wu Fengguang <[email protected]>

---
fs/seq_file.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

--- linux-2.6.22-git15.orig/fs/seq_file.c
+++ linux-2.6.22-git15/fs/seq_file.c
@@ -13,6 +13,8 @@
#include <asm/uaccess.h>
#include <asm/page.h>

+#define SEQFILE_SHOW_NEXT LONG_MAX
+
/**
* seq_open - initialize sequential file
* @file: file we initialize
@@ -93,6 +95,7 @@ ssize_t seq_read(struct file *file, char
/* if not empty - flush it first */
if (m->count) {
n = min(m->count, size);
+ BUG_ON(m->from == SEQFILE_SHOW_NEXT);
err = copy_to_user(buf, m->buf + m->from, n);
if (err)
goto Efault;
@@ -102,7 +105,7 @@ ssize_t seq_read(struct file *file, char
buf += n;
copied += n;
if (!m->count)
- m->index++;
+ m->from = SEQFILE_SHOW_NEXT;
if (!size)
goto Done;
}
@@ -113,9 +116,11 @@ ssize_t seq_read(struct file *file, char
err = PTR_ERR(p);
if (!p || IS_ERR(p))
break;
- err = m->op->show(m, p);
- if (err)
- break;
+ if (m->from != SEQFILE_SHOW_NEXT) {
+ err = m->op->show(m, p);
+ if (err)
+ break;
+ }
if (m->count < m->size)
goto Fill;
m->op->stop(m, p);
@@ -156,7 +161,7 @@ Fill:
if (m->count)
m->from = n;
else
- pos++;
+ m->from = SEQFILE_SHOW_NEXT;
m->index = pos;
Done:
if (!copied)
@@ -211,12 +216,9 @@ static int traverse(struct seq_file *m,
}
pos += m->count;
m->count = 0;
- if (pos == offset) {
- index++;
- m->index = index;
- break;
- }
p = m->op->next(m, p, &index);
+ if (pos == offset)
+ break;
}
m->op->stop(m, p);
return error;

2007-08-15 04:19:04

by Al Viro

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Sort module list by pointer address to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:39:45AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 11:08:46AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >
> > static void *m_next(struct seq_file *m, void *p, loff_t *pos)
> > {
> > - return seq_list_next(p, &modules, pos);
> > + return seq_sorted_list_next(p, &modules, &m->private);
> > }
>
> In theory it is not safe to use something other than the passed in
> *pos as an position indicator. Because seq_file do not always call
> ->next() to advance to the next item. Look at seq_file.c, it sometimes
> increase the pos/index directly! Which also prevents pos to skip
> forward, which is preferred in your case.
>
> The attached patch tries to fix it.
>
> The seq_file.c is so twisted!
>
> Fengguang
> ===
>
> seqfile: remove seq_file's assumption about iterators
>
> The seq_file implementation has some hardcoded index++/pos++ lines,
> which assumes iterators to be *continuous* integers.

What the fuck? It assumes no such thing and a lot of iterators are
nothing like integers. What are you talking about?

2007-08-15 06:37:58

by Wu Fengguang

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Sort module list by pointer address to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 05:18:45AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 11:39:45AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
>> seqfile: remove seq_file's assumption about iterators
>>
>> The seq_file implementation has some hardcoded index++/pos++ lines,
>> which assumes iterators to be *continuous* integers.
>
>What the fuck? It assumes no such thing and a lot of iterators are
>nothing like integers. What are you talking about?

Oh I used the wrong term...

Take for example this function from lwn.net:

static void *ct_seq_next(struct seq_file *s, void *v, loff_t *pos)
{
loff_t *spos = (loff_t *) v;
*pos = ++(*spos);
return spos;
}

I mean 'pos' is sometimes increased in ct_seq_next(), and sometimes from
seq_file.c/seq_read(), too. Thus we cannot reliably do this:

*pos = (*spos) + some_variable_offset;


You are referring to spos as the iterator, are you?

Maybe I'm wrong. I'll dip more into it.

2007-08-15 06:53:32

by Al Viro

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Sort module list by pointer address to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 02:37:41PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> static void *ct_seq_next(struct seq_file *s, void *v, loff_t *pos)
> {
> loff_t *spos = (loff_t *) v;
> *pos = ++(*spos);
> return spos;
> }
>
> I mean 'pos' is sometimes increased in ct_seq_next(), and sometimes from
> seq_file.c/seq_read(), too. Thus we cannot reliably do this:
>
> *pos = (*spos) + some_variable_offset;

Of course we can. These guys can be sparse - note that ->start()
takes a pointer, and for a good reason. ->start(m, p, pos) should
get the first entry with offset >= *pos (or NULL if we are done) and
set *pos accordingly.

That m->index++ is "we are done with the partial, step just past it, so
that ->start() will pick the first real entry after it the next time it's
called".

For dense case we don't need to update *pos in ->start() - either
we already have one with offset == *pos (and no update is needed),
or we are finished and should return NULL.

However, we have every right to live with sparse offsets; prototype of
->start() had been done the way it's done exactly to allow that kind
of use.

2007-08-15 08:37:14

by Wu Fengguang

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Sort module list by pointer address to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:53:01AM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 02:37:41PM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote:
> > static void *ct_seq_next(struct seq_file *s, void *v, loff_t *pos)
> > {
> > loff_t *spos = (loff_t *) v;
> > *pos = ++(*spos);
> > return spos;
> > }
> >
> > I mean 'pos' is sometimes increased in ct_seq_next(), and sometimes from
> > seq_file.c/seq_read(), too. Thus we cannot reliably do this:
> >
> > *pos = (*spos) + some_variable_offset;
>
> Of course we can. These guys can be sparse - note that ->start()
> takes a pointer, and for a good reason. ->start(m, p, pos) should
> get the first entry with offset >= *pos (or NULL if we are done) and
> set *pos accordingly.
>
> That m->index++ is "we are done with the partial, step just past it, so
> that ->start() will pick the first real entry after it the next time it's
> called".
>
> For dense case we don't need to update *pos in ->start() - either
> we already have one with offset == *pos (and no update is needed),
> or we are finished and should return NULL.
>
> However, we have every right to live with sparse offsets; prototype of
> ->start() had been done the way it's done exactly to allow that kind
> of use.

So sparse offsets are supported, with some special cares on ->start.

My case is to scan the address space in ranges. The "object" is the
start offset of a range:

__________________#######______________________#############__________
^start ^start

Now the solution can be:
- ->show shows the current range
- ->next seeks to next range
- ->start must *also* do the seek

The last requirement is made clear by you, a fact I refused to accept :)
My old concept was that a ->next should be called to move pages
forward after a new start.

2007-08-15 08:46:50

by Wu Fengguang

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Sort module list by pointer address to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators

Al Viro,

Does this sounds like a good fix?
===

seq_file version fixes

- f_version is 'unsigned long', it's pointless to do more than that.
- m->version should not be reset when we are bumping up the buf size.

Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <[email protected]>
---
fs/seq_file.c | 1 -
include/linux/seq_file.h | 2 +-
2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- linux-2.6.23-rc3.orig/include/linux/seq_file.h
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc3/include/linux/seq_file.h
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ struct seq_file {
size_t from;
size_t count;
loff_t index;
- loff_t version;
+ unsigned long version;
struct mutex lock;
const struct seq_operations *op;
void *private;
--- linux-2.6.23-rc3.orig/fs/seq_file.c
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc3/fs/seq_file.c
@@ -134,7 +134,6 @@ ssize_t seq_read(struct file *file, char
if (!m->buf)
goto Enomem;
m->count = 0;
- m->version = 0;
}
m->op->stop(m, p);
m->count = 0;

2007-08-18 15:56:23

by Mathieu Desnoyers

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Sort module list by pointer address to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators

* Fengguang Wu ([email protected]) wrote:
> Al Viro,
>
> Does this sounds like a good fix?
> ===
>
> seq_file version fixes
>
> - f_version is 'unsigned long', it's pointless to do more than that.

Hrm, this is weird...

fs.h:

struct inode
u64 i_version;

and

struct file
unsigned long f_version;

Users do:

fs/ext3/dir.c:

if (filp->f_version != inode->i_version) {

So why isn't f_version a u64 ? It becomes a problem if versions gets
higher than 2^32 and we are on an architecture where longs are 32 bits.
I think the problem is the f_version field type, not in seq_file at all.
I'll prepare a patch for this.

> - m->version should not be reset when we are bumping up the buf size.
>

Hrmmmm, what is this twisted use of versions anyway ?!?

If I look at other version users elsewhere in the kernel, they mostly
do:

repeat:
f_version = i_version
do something
if (f_version != i_version)
repeat;

So they can see if the underlying inode has changed during the
operation. seq_file does it completely the other way around:

m->version = f_version;
do something

and, well, versions are never really used at all.

If we want to use versioning there, we should keep a version counter
associated with the ressource pointed used by seq_files that would be
incremented each time the data structures are modified.

Then, in the read side, we could sanely do:

seq open():
f_version = current version

seq read():
repeat:
m->version = f_version;
do something
if (m->version != current version)
repeat;

This would only make sure that the given read operation has consistent
data. It would not certify data consistency across reads.

I have looked at fs/proc.c/task_mmu.c use of m->version, and I think it
is just really weird. I think the proper way to do it would be to put
the last_addr in a field of a structure to which m->private would point
to.

Mathieu

> Signed-off-by: Fengguang Wu <[email protected]>
> ---
> fs/seq_file.c | 1 -
> include/linux/seq_file.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc3.orig/include/linux/seq_file.h
> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc3/include/linux/seq_file.h
> @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ struct seq_file {
> size_t from;
> size_t count;
> loff_t index;
> - loff_t version;
> + unsigned long version;
> struct mutex lock;
> const struct seq_operations *op;
> void *private;
> --- linux-2.6.23-rc3.orig/fs/seq_file.c
> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc3/fs/seq_file.c
> @@ -134,7 +134,6 @@ ssize_t seq_read(struct file *file, char
> if (!m->buf)
> goto Enomem;
> m->count = 0;
> - m->version = 0;
> }
> m->op->stop(m, p);
> m->count = 0;
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68

2007-08-24 15:39:47

by Mathieu Desnoyers

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: [PATCH] Sort module list - use ppos instead of m->private

Sort modules list - use ppos instead of m->private

When reading the data by small chunks (i.e. byte by byte), the index (ppos) is
incremented by seq_read() directly and no "next" callback is called when going
to the next module.

Therefore, use ppos instead of m->private to deal with the fact that this index
is incremented directly to pass to the next module in seq_read() after the
buffer has been emptied.

Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]>
---
fs/seq_file.c | 17 +++++++++--------
include/linux/seq_file.h | 4 ++--
kernel/module.c | 6 ++----
3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

Index: linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/module.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/kernel/module.c 2007-08-24 11:34:36.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/kernel/module.c 2007-08-24 11:35:40.000000000 -0400
@@ -2418,14 +2418,12 @@ unsigned long module_kallsyms_lookup_nam
static void *m_start(struct seq_file *m, loff_t *pos)
{
mutex_lock(&module_mutex);
- if (!*pos)
- m->private = NULL;
- return seq_sorted_list_start(&modules, m->private);
+ return seq_sorted_list_start(&modules, (void*)(long)pos);
}

static void *m_next(struct seq_file *m, void *p, loff_t *pos)
{
- return seq_sorted_list_next(p, &modules, &m->private);
+ return seq_sorted_list_next(p, &modules, (void**)pos);
}

static void m_stop(struct seq_file *m, void *p)
Index: linux-2.6-lttng/include/linux/seq_file.h
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/include/linux/seq_file.h 2007-08-24 11:34:01.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/include/linux/seq_file.h 2007-08-24 11:34:59.000000000 -0400
@@ -73,9 +73,9 @@ extern struct list_head *seq_list_next(v
* seq_sorted_list_start_head().
*/
extern struct list_head *seq_sorted_list_start(struct list_head *head,
- void *pos);
+ void **ppos);
extern struct list_head *seq_sorted_list_start_head(struct list_head *head,
- void *pos);
+ void **ppos);
/*
* next must be called with an existing p node
*/
Index: linux-2.6-lttng/fs/seq_file.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-lttng.orig/fs/seq_file.c 2007-08-24 11:34:01.000000000 -0400
+++ linux-2.6-lttng/fs/seq_file.c 2007-08-24 11:34:59.000000000 -0400
@@ -501,27 +501,28 @@ struct list_head *seq_list_next(void *v,

EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_list_next);

-struct list_head *seq_sorted_list_start(struct list_head *head, void *pos)
+struct list_head *seq_sorted_list_start(struct list_head *head, void **ppos)
{
struct list_head *lh;

list_for_each(lh, head)
- if ((void*)lh >= pos)
- return lh;
+ if ((void*)lh >= *ppos)
+ return *ppos = lh;
return NULL;
}

EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_sorted_list_start);

-struct list_head *seq_sorted_list_start_head(struct list_head *head, void *pos)
+struct list_head *seq_sorted_list_start_head(struct list_head *head,
+ void **ppos)
{
struct list_head *lh;

- if (!pos)
- return head;
+ if (!ppos)
+ return *ppos = head;
list_for_each(lh, head)
- if ((void*)lh >= pos)
- return lh->prev;
+ if ((void*)lh >= *ppos)
+ return *ppos = lh->prev;
return NULL;
}

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68

2007-08-24 23:35:49

by Andrew Morton

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Sort module list - use ppos instead of m->private

On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:39:33 -0400
Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]> wrote:

> Sort modules list - use ppos instead of m->private
>
> When reading the data by small chunks (i.e. byte by byte), the index (ppos) is
> incremented by seq_read() directly and no "next" callback is called when going
> to the next module.
>
> Therefore, use ppos instead of m->private to deal with the fact that this index
> is incremented directly to pass to the next module in seq_read() after the
> buffer has been emptied.

Confused. What problem is this patch fixing? I'm guessing that something
is going wrong when /proc/modules is read one-byte-at-a-time?

<tests that>

<nope>

Better changelogs, please.

2007-08-25 00:10:27

by Mathieu Desnoyers

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Sort module list - use ppos instead of m->private

* Andrew Morton ([email protected]) wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:39:33 -0400
> Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Sort modules list - use ppos instead of m->private
> >
> > When reading the data by small chunks (i.e. byte by byte), the index (ppos) is
> > incremented by seq_read() directly and no "next" callback is called when going
> > to the next module.
> >
> > Therefore, use ppos instead of m->private to deal with the fact that this index
> > is incremented directly to pass to the next module in seq_read() after the
> > buffer has been emptied.
>
> Confused. What problem is this patch fixing? I'm guessing that something
> is going wrong when /proc/modules is read one-byte-at-a-time?
>
> <tests that>
>
> <nope>
>
> Better changelogs, please.
>

Ok, will append this in the changelog (I sent this to Rusty earlier
today):

Small test program for this:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <fcntl.h>

#define BUFSIZE 1024

int main()
{
int fd = open("/proc/modules", O_RDONLY);
char buf[BUFSIZE];
ssize_t size;

do {
size = read(fd, buf, 1);
printf("%c", buf[0]);
usleep(100000);
} while(size > 0);

close(fd);
return 0;
}

Before fix, it prints the first module indefinitely. The patch fixes
this.

I will also append more detail to "Sort module list by pointer address
to get coherent sleepable seq_file iterators" changelog before the
2.6.23-rc3-mm1 repost.

Mathieu

--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68