On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 03:55:22PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 11/09/20 2:41 pm, pet...@infradead.org wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 12:16:17PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> >> Add synchronize_rcu() after list_del_rcu() in
> >> ftrace_remove_trampoline_from_kallsyms() to protect readers of
> >> ftrace_ops_trampoline_list (in ftrace_get_trampoline_kallsym)
> >> which is used when kallsyms is read.
> >>
> >> Fixes: fc0ea795f53c8d ("ftrace: Add symbols for ftrace trampolines")
> >> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hun...@intel.com>
> >> ---
> >> kernel/trace/ftrace.c | 1 +
> >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
> >> index 275441254bb5..4e64367c9774 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/trace/ftrace.c
> >> @@ -2782,6 +2782,7 @@ static void
> >> ftrace_remove_trampoline_from_kallsyms(struct ftrace_ops *ops)
> >> {
> >> lockdep_assert_held(&ftrace_lock);
> >> list_del_rcu(&ops->list);
> >> + synchronize_rcu();
> >> }
> >
> >
> > Hurmph, we've just done a ton of that:
> >
> >
> > ftrace_shutdown()
> > synchronize_rcu_tasks_rude()
> > ftrace_trampoline_free()
> > ftrace_remove_trampoline_from_kallsyms()
> >
> >
> > So would it not be better to move that call before the existing
> > synchronize_rcu_tasks stuff rather than adding another synchronize_rcu()
> > call?
>
> Doesn't that mean removing the symbol while the trampoline is potentially
> still in use?
Hurm.. potentially yes. OK, lets do this first.
