Skip to contentSkip to conversation

fs: warn in case userspace lied about modprobe return

PATCH Superseded Luis R. Rodriguez 2 participants 3 messages May 26, 2017 – Jun 1, 2017 VFS

v1 of 2 Superseded Latest is v2 →

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 fs: warn in case userspace lied about modprobe return

kmod <= v19 was broken -- it could return 0 to modprobe calls, incorrectly assuming that a kernel module was built-in, whereas in reality the module was just forming in the kernel. The reason for this is an incorrect userspace heuristics. A userspace kmod fix is available for it [0], however should userspace break again we could go on with an failed get_fs_type() which is hard to debug as the request_module() is detected as returning 0. The first suspect would be that there is something worth with the kernel's module loader and obviously in this case that is not the issue.

Since these issues are painful to debug complain when we know userspace has outright lied to us.

[0] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/kernel/kmod/kmod.git/commit/libkmod/libkmod-module.c?id=fd44a98ae2eb5eb32161088954ab21e58e19dfc4

---
 fs/filesystems.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
fs/filesystems.c +3 -1
index cac75547d35c..0f477a5de6ea 100644
@@ -275,8 +275,10 @@ struct file_system_type *get_fs_type(const char *name)
 	int len = dot ? dot - name : strlen(name);
 
 	fs = __get_fs_type(name, len);
-	if (!fs && (request_module("fs-%.*s", len, name) == 0))
+	if (!fs && (request_module("fs-%.*s", len, name) == 0)) {
+		WARN_ONCE(!fs, "request_module fs-%.*s succeeded, but still no fs?\n", len, name);
 		fs = __get_fs_type(name, len);
+	}
 
 	if (dot && fs && !(fs->fs_flags & FS_HAS_SUBTYPE)) {
 		put_filesystem(fs);
Signature · 1 line
2.11.0
#1 lore raw

+++ Luis R. Rodriguez [25/05/17 17:44 -0700]:

Quoted 27 lines

kmod <= v19 was broken -- it could return 0 to modprobe calls, incorrectly assuming that a kernel module was built-in, whereas in reality the module was just forming in the kernel. The reason for this is an incorrect userspace heuristics. A userspace kmod fix is available for it [0], however should userspace break again we could go on with an failed get_fs_type() which is hard to debug as the request_module() is detected as returning 0. The first suspect would be that there is something worth with the kernel's module loader and obviously in this case that is not the issue.

Since these issues are painful to debug complain when we know userspace has outright lied to us.

[0] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/kernel/kmod/kmod.git/commit/libkmod/libkmod-module.c?id=fd44a98ae2eb5eb32161088954ab21e58e19dfc4

---
fs/filesystems.c | 4 +++-

1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
fs/filesystems.c +0 -0
index cac75547d35c..0f477a5de6ea 100644

fs/filesystems.c struct file_system_type *get_fs_type(const char *name) · line 279

Quoted 6 lines
fs/filesystems.c +2 -1
@@ -275,8 +275,10 @@ struct file_system_type *get_fs_type(const char *name)
 	int len = dot ? dot - name : strlen(name);
 
 	fs = __get_fs_type(name, len);
-	if (!fs && (request_module("fs-%.*s", len, name) == 0))
+	if (!fs && (request_module("fs-%.*s", len, name) == 0)) {
+		WARN_ONCE(!fs, "request_module fs-%.*s succeeded, but still no fs?\n", len, name);

The WARN needs to go below the second __get_fs_type() attempt, no? Because we want to try __get_fs_type() again right after request_module(), to see if the fs loaded, and _then_ WARN if it doesn't appear to be loaded.

Jessica

Quoted 7 lines
fs/filesystems.c +1 -0
 		fs = __get_fs_type(name, len);
+	}
 
 	if (dot && fs && !(fs->fs_flags & FS_HAS_SUBTYPE)) {
 		put_filesystem(fs);
Signature · 1 line
2.11.0
#2 lore raw
Quoted 30 lines · Jessica Yu

+++ Luis R. Rodriguez [25/05/17 17:44 -0700]:

Quoted 29 lines

kmod <= v19 was broken -- it could return 0 to modprobe calls, incorrectly assuming that a kernel module was built-in, whereas in reality the module was just forming in the kernel. The reason for this is an incorrect userspace heuristics. A userspace kmod fix is available for it [0], however should userspace break again we could go on with an failed get_fs_type() which is hard to debug as the request_module() is detected as returning 0. The first suspect would be that there is something worth with the kernel's module loader and obviously in this case that is not the issue.

Since these issues are painful to debug complain when we know userspace has outright lied to us.

[0] http://git.kernel.org/cgit/utils/kernel/kmod/kmod.git/commit/libkmod/libkmod-module.c?id=fd44a98ae2eb5eb32161088954ab21e58e19dfc4

---
fs/filesystems.c | 4 +++-

1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
fs/filesystems.c +0 -0
index cac75547d35c..0f477a5de6ea 100644
@@ -275,8 +275,10 @@ struct file_system_type *get_fs_type(const char *name)
 	int len = dot ? dot - name : strlen(name);
 
Quoted 9 lines

fs/filesystems.c struct file_system_type *get_fs_type(const char *name) · line 279

Quoted 4 lines
fs/filesystems.c +2 -1
 	fs = __get_fs_type(name, len);
-	if (!fs && (request_module("fs-%.*s", len, name) == 0))
+	if (!fs && (request_module("fs-%.*s", len, name) == 0)) {
+		WARN_ONCE(!fs, "request_module fs-%.*s succeeded, but still no fs?\n", len, name);

The WARN needs to go below the second __get_fs_type() attempt, no? Because we want to try __get_fs_type() again right after request_module(), to see if the fs loaded, and _then_ WARN if it doesn't appear to be loaded.

Doh, yes, sorry will send v2.

Luis