Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 16:20:23 +0100
From: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>
To: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
Cc: jpoimboe@redhat.com, jeyu@kernel.org, jikos@kernel.org,
        jbaron@akamai.com, live-patching@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] livepatch: add locking to force and signal functions
Message-ID: <20171221152023.ed2lz2hwuczqwz46@pathway.suse.cz>
References: <20171221134043.32543-1-mbenes@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171221134043.32543-1-mbenes@suse.cz>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170421 (1.8.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 938
Lines: 23

On Thu 2017-12-21 14:40:43, Miroslav Benes wrote:
> klp_send_signals() and klp_force_transition() do not acquire klp_mutex,
> because it seemed to be superfluous. A potential race in
> klp_send_signals() was harmless and there was nothing in
> klp_force_transition() which needed to be synchronized. That changed
> with the addition of klp_forced variable during the review process.
> 
> There is a small window now, when klp_complete_transition() does not see
> klp_forced set to true while all tasks have been already transitioned to
> the target state. module_put() is called and the module can be removed.
> 
> Acquire klp_mutex in sysfs callback to prevent it. Do the same for the
> signal sending just to be sure. There is no real downside to that.
> 
> Reported-by: Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>
> Signed-off-by: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>

Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>

Best Regards,
Petr