lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Aug]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] livepatch: Clear relocation targets on a module removal
On 8/1/22 17:19, Song Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 3:25 AM Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Sat 2022-07-30 20:20:22, Song Liu wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 3:32 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 8:54 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 4:33 PM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 10:51:47AM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
>>>>>>> From: Miroslav Benes <mbenes@suse.cz>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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'
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> 3) A selftest would be a good idea.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I found it is pretty tricky to run the selftests inside a qemu VM. How about
>>>> we test it with modules in samples/livepatch? Specifically, we can add a
>>>> script try to reload livepatch-shadow-mod.ko.
>>>
>>> Actually, livepatch-shadow-mod.ko doesn't have the reload problem before
>>> the fix. Is this expected?
>>
>> Good question. I am afraid that there is no easy way to prepare
>> the selftest at the moment.
>>
>> There are two situations when a symbol from the livepatched module is
>> relocated:
>>
>>
>> 1. The livepatch might access a symbol exported by the module via
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(). In this case, it is "normal" external symbol
>> and it gets relocated by the module loader.
>>
>> But EXPORT_SYMBOL() will create an explicit dependency between the
>> livepatch and livepatched module. As a result, the livepatch
>> module could be loaded only when the livepatched module is loaded.
>> And the livepatched module could not be removed when the livepatch
>> module is loaded.
>>
>> In this case, the problem will not exist. Well, the developers
>> of the livepatch module will probably want to avoid this
>> dependency.
>>
>>
>> 2. The livepatch module might access a non-exported symbol from another
>> module using the special elf section for klp relocation, see
>> section, see Documentation/livepatch/module-elf-format.rst
>>
>> These symbols are relocated in klp_apply_section_relocs().
>>
>> The problem is that upstream does not have a support to
>> create this elf section. There is a patchset for this, see
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220216163940.228309-1-joe.lawrence@redhat.com/
>> It requires some more review.
>>
>>
>> Resume: I think that we could not prepare the selftest without
>> upstreaming klp-convert tool.
>
> Thanks for the explanation! I suspected the same issue, but couldn't
> connect all the logic.
>
> I guess the selftests can wait until the klp-convert tool.
>

Hi Song,

Petr is correct about selftests and these relocations. Let me know if
rebasing the klp-convert patchset would be helpful in your testing.
Otherwise kpatch-build is the only (easy?) way to create klp-relocations
as far as I know. (For limited arches anyway.)

Thanks,

--
Joe

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-08-02 14:32    [W:0.089 / U:0.748 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site