Received: by 2002:a25:824b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d11csp108830ybn; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 02:18:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxIpU3PZlExspKAUTAKDfkeAFGM5FMMGcp7vxt1BolGBNMr+m2492pm8Q4mr53oKFIxdxQ4 X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4ec2:: with SMTP id i2mr6872992ejv.83.1570094325208; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 02:18:45 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1570094325; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=rNVICXjQpxWnJEc7jbGmskcu0lBVt784Fhi0iQUqa8mF4mULT4Upu0KDKDTdnr89O2 YWUf/1chQDs2pTsyACo2SOAgkXyFQ7Gl+JLcE7Z30zhAhcE5QMKP8FVgVQL5mSiTxAfE jcHWB89IVbBoYmoE3kp0w1s7uBJY+xbcSJ4j0UayPRsZ27K2twI+l1zABNvvxR75bSGy D1gTVScfARq8baoi8HJH/qpZPab3FLuQ03DEwKRz8qvmsdRN92lQU1e/L/tZr7ELVAwM KrC5G79HFXYe4ttsZdvzD8AGqtIngVMp8YfUirQEU6vY27A/UTBso7XFPRgchH3ZGROw NR6w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:user-agent:references :message-id:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=2KrlmOw5HeIx0m6d7WbHg3uLXxiBphHbh1hCkds9ugM=; b=kyjp0BN0SS0QXvlSt+2k2awHL7JzIZ1ihbQ1CyayykCQTKx6hcNmNa1ugqF4Qwtsa6 2BMoIdFBgqT5dwOuWZpIahADnL5CHI6Uv2eNtEdJleXOVAJon+JNFL8+Ja/73QYORp/R gSFuwFmHMb1sbUXfLuyPMke1eP49pvOUsATYrcmBzHXGwgkrzkdJACtyUHpwP4hKZq0F moxKACdkWEjzp2s041Kcc/4SIvkfQ4W+f+kpjFptD/5PO20OFlt2j/hzcZxfxbq8oGer vlLID9+TIkdXRwq19uN5ZkNJVzWKBaQjY5svOS6yy7OyiuzcJRtSyomHTDcW9S7l6FBV i3Tw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v17si908648ejq.5.2019.10.03.02.18.20; Thu, 03 Oct 2019 02:18:45 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729103AbfJCJSB (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 3 Oct 2019 05:18:01 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:54936 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728767AbfJCJSB (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2019 05:18:01 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E74DBAD73; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 09:17:59 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 11:17:35 +0200 (CEST) From: Miroslav Benes To: Josh Poimboeuf cc: jikos@kernel.org, pmladek@suse.com, joe.lawrence@redhat.com, nstange@suse.de, live-patching@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/3] livepatch: Clear relocation targets on a module removal In-Reply-To: <20191002181817.xpiqiisg5ybtwhru@treble> Message-ID: References: <20190905124514.8944-1-mbenes@suse.cz> <20190905124514.8944-2-mbenes@suse.cz> <20191002181817.xpiqiisg5ybtwhru@treble> User-Agent: Alpine 2.21 (LSU 202 2017-01-01) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2 Oct 2019, Josh Poimboeuf wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 02:45:12PM +0200, Miroslav Benes wrote: > > Josh reported a bug: > > > > When the object to be patched is a module, and that module is > > rmmod'ed and reloaded, it fails to load with: > > > > module: x86/modules: Skipping invalid relocation target, existing value is nonzero for type 2, loc 00000000ba0302e9, val ffffffffa03e293c > > livepatch: failed to initialize patch 'livepatch_nfsd' for module 'nfsd' (-8) > > livepatch: patch 'livepatch_nfsd' failed for module 'nfsd', refusing to load module 'nfsd' > > > > The livepatch module has a relocation which references a symbol > > in the _previous_ loading of nfsd. When apply_relocate_add() > > tries to replace the old relocation with a new one, it sees that > > the previous one is nonzero and it errors out. > > > > On ppc64le, we have a similar issue: > > > > module_64: livepatch_nfsd: Expected nop after call, got e8410018 at e_show+0x60/0x548 [livepatch_nfsd] > > livepatch: failed to initialize patch 'livepatch_nfsd' for module 'nfsd' (-8) > > livepatch: patch 'livepatch_nfsd' failed for module 'nfsd', refusing to load module 'nfsd' > > > > He also proposed three different solutions. We could remove the error > > check in apply_relocate_add() introduced by commit eda9cec4c9a1 > > ("x86/module: Detect and skip invalid relocations"). However the check > > is useful for detecting corrupted modules. > > > > We could also deny the patched modules to be removed. If it proved to be > > a major drawback for users, we could still implement a different > > approach. The solution would also complicate the existing code a lot. > > > > We thus decided to reverse the relocation patching (clear all relocation > > targets on x86_64, or return back nops on powerpc). The solution is not > > universal and is too much arch-specific, but it may prove to be simpler > > in the end. > > > > Reported-by: Josh Poimboeuf > > Signed-off-by: Miroslav Benes > > Since we decided to fix late module patching at LPC, the commit message > and clear_relocate_add() should both probably clarify that these > functions are hacks which are relatively temporary, until we fix the > root cause. It was the plan, but thanks for pointing it out explicitly. I could forget. > But this patch gives me a bad feeling :-/ Not that I have a better > idea. I know what you are talking about. > Has anybody seen this problem in the real world? If not, maybe we'd be > better off just pretending the problem doesn't exist for now. I don't think so. You reported the issue originally and I guess it happened during the testing. Then there is a report from Huawei, but it suggests testing environment too. Reloading modules seems artificial to me. So I agree, we can pretend the issue does not exist and wait for the real solution. Miroslav