On 13 June 2017 at 11:07, Florian Westphal <f...@strlen.de> wrote:
> Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:16 PM, Florian Westphal <f...@strlen.de> wrote:
>> > Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 1:52 AM, Florian Westphal <f...@strlen.de> wrote:
>> >> > Joe described it nicely, problem is that after unload we may have
>> >> > conntracks that still have a nf_conn_help extension attached that
>> >> > has a pointer to a structure that resided in the (unloaded) module.
>> >>
>> >> Why not hold a refcnt for its module?
>> >
>> > That would work as well.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure its nice to disallow rmmod of helper modules if they are
>> > used by a connection however.
>>
>> I am _not_ suggesting to disallow rmmod.
>
> My point was that if you hold reference counts to the module users
> will need to manually flush conntrack table (or at least manually
> remove affected connections), else rmmod won't work as refcount might be
> gt 0.
>
>> > Right now you can "rmmod nf_conntrack_foo" at any time and this should
>> > work just fine without first having to flush affected conntracks
>> > manually.
>>
>> My point is that since netns wq could invoke code of that module,
>> why it doesn't hold a refcnt of that module?
>
> *shrug*, I did not write this stuff.
>
> Historically it wasn't needed because we just clear out the helper area
> in the affected conntracks (i.e, future packets are not inspected by
> the helper anymore).
>
> When conntracks were made per-netns this problem was added as we're not
> guaranteed to see all net namespace because module_exit and netns cleanup
> can run concurrently.
>
> We can still use the "old" model if we guarantee that we wait for
> netns cleanup to finish (which is what this patch does).
>
> The alternative, as you pointed out, is to take a module reference for
> each conntrack that uses the helper (and put again when connection is
> destroyed).
>
> I don't really care that much except that if we go for the latter
> solution users cannot "just rmmod" the module anymore but might have
> to manually remove the affected connections first.

The barrier approach sounds less surprising from user perspective for
this very reason.

Reply via email to