Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

linux/spl: safe cleanup in spl_proc_fini() #15234

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 2, 2023

Conversation

arighi
Copy link
Contributor

@arighi arighi commented Sep 1, 2023

Motivation and Context

Fix a potential double call to unregister_sysctl_table() in spl.

Description

If we fail to create a proc entry in spl_proc_init() we may end up calling unregister_sysctl_table() twice: one in the failure path of spl_proc_init() and another time during spl_proc_fini().

Avoid the double call to unregister_sysctl_table() and while at it refactor the code a bit to reduce code duplication.

How Has This Been Tested?

This change has been tested recompiling and loading/unloading spl.ko and zfs.ko.

The test has been performed in a local VM: Ubuntu Mantic (23.10) with a 6.5 kernel.

Types of changes

  • [x ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Performance enhancement (non-breaking change which improves efficiency)
  • [ x] Code cleanup (non-breaking change which makes code smaller or more readable)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • Library ABI change (libzfs, libzfs_core, libnvpair, libuutil and libzfsbootenv)
  • Documentation (a change to man pages or other documentation)

Checklist:

  • [ x] My code follows the OpenZFS code style requirements.
  • [ x] I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • [ x] I have read the contributing document.
  • [ x] I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • I have run the ZFS Test Suite with this change applied.
  • [ x] All commit messages are properly formatted and contain Signed-off-by.

If we fail to create a proc entry in spl_proc_init() we may end up
calling unregister_sysctl_table() twice: one in the failure path of
spl_proc_init() and another time during spl_proc_fini().

Avoid the double call to unregister_sysctl_table() and while at it
refactor the code a bit to reduce code duplication.

Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com>
@behlendorf behlendorf added the Status: Accepted Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested) label Sep 2, 2023
@behlendorf behlendorf merged commit bcb1159 into openzfs:master Sep 2, 2023
18 of 19 checks passed
stgraber pushed a commit to zabbly/zfs that referenced this pull request Sep 5, 2023
If we fail to create a proc entry in spl_proc_init() we may end up
calling unregister_sysctl_table() twice: one in the failure path of
spl_proc_init() and another time during spl_proc_fini().

Avoid the double call to unregister_sysctl_table() and while at it
refactor the code a bit to reduce code duplication.

This was accidentally introduced when the spl code was
updated for Linux 6.5 compatibility.

Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Reviewed-by: Ameer Hamza <ahamza@ixsystems.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com>
Closes openzfs#15234 
Closes openzfs#15235
stgraber pushed a commit to zabbly/zfs that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2023
If we fail to create a proc entry in spl_proc_init() we may end up
calling unregister_sysctl_table() twice: one in the failure path of
spl_proc_init() and another time during spl_proc_fini().

Avoid the double call to unregister_sysctl_table() and while at it
refactor the code a bit to reduce code duplication.

This was accidentally introduced when the spl code was
updated for Linux 6.5 compatibility.

Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Reviewed-by: Ameer Hamza <ahamza@ixsystems.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com>
Closes openzfs#15234 
Closes openzfs#15235
behlendorf pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2023
If we fail to create a proc entry in spl_proc_init() we may end up
calling unregister_sysctl_table() twice: one in the failure path of
spl_proc_init() and another time during spl_proc_fini().

Avoid the double call to unregister_sysctl_table() and while at it
refactor the code a bit to reduce code duplication.

This was accidentally introduced when the spl code was
updated for Linux 6.5 compatibility.

Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Reviewed-by: Ameer Hamza <ahamza@ixsystems.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com>
Closes #15234 
Closes #15235
tonyhutter pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 27, 2023
If we fail to create a proc entry in spl_proc_init() we may end up
calling unregister_sysctl_table() twice: one in the failure path of
spl_proc_init() and another time during spl_proc_fini().

Avoid the double call to unregister_sysctl_table() and while at it
refactor the code a bit to reduce code duplication.

This was accidentally introduced when the spl code was
updated for Linux 6.5 compatibility.

Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Reviewed-by: Ameer Hamza <ahamza@ixsystems.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com>
Closes #15234 
Closes #15235
lundman pushed a commit to openzfsonwindows/openzfs that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2023
If we fail to create a proc entry in spl_proc_init() we may end up
calling unregister_sysctl_table() twice: one in the failure path of
spl_proc_init() and another time during spl_proc_fini().

Avoid the double call to unregister_sysctl_table() and while at it
refactor the code a bit to reduce code duplication.

This was accidentally introduced when the spl code was
updated for Linux 6.5 compatibility.

Reviewed-by: Brian Behlendorf <behlendorf1@llnl.gov>
Reviewed-by: Ameer Hamza <ahamza@ixsystems.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi <andrea.righi@canonical.com>
Closes openzfs#15234 
Closes openzfs#15235
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Status: Accepted Ready to integrate (reviewed, tested)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants