On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 02:37:43PM +0200, Hans Schillstrom wrote:
> >On Tue, 17 Apr 2012, Hans Schillstrom wrote:
> >> I wonder if we are chasing ghosts...
> >> With proper fault handling I can't even see a case when it (net->ipvs) can
> >> be used.
> >> Can you see a case when it could happen?
> >> Still we can set it to NULL on error exit and cleanup as you suggested,
> >> that doesn't harm I think.
> >> A. If you add a netns and it fails the entire ns will be rolled back,
> >> and no access to that ns can occur.
> >> That ns does not exist
> > Agreed
> >> B. If you insert ip_vs.ko when having one or more name spaces and
> >> __ip_vs_init() returns an error the module will be unloaded.
> >> All ready loaded ns will not be affected.
> > Yes, ip_vs_init fails.
> >> C. insmod of ex. ip_vs_ftp only affects loaded name spaces
> >> and if the load of ip_vs_ftp fails it will be unloaded without
> >> affecting ip_vs(.ko)
> >> (If ip_vs.ko is not loaded then it has to be loaded first case B...)
> >> With a "compiled in" ip_vs case B doesn't exist.
> > It is this case that can happen, we can only guess how
> >difficult is to get ENOMEM here. IIRC, we can generate only
> >ENOMEM error on IPVS core load.
> > I assume Simon has such setup and changes code to
> >trigger load error. When I generate ENOMEM on IPVS core init
> >for such case I get ENOENT from register_ip_vs_app when
> >patch 1 and 2 for apps are applied, i.e. net->ipvs is NULL.
> >You can check it with NF_CONNTRACK=y, IP_VS=y and
> >IP_VS_FTP=m. You only need to trigger ENOMEM in __ip_vs_init.
> I did test this with 4 netns loaded and modprobe ip_vs_ftp
> In the 4:th netns (ipvs->gen >= 4) fire a -ENOMEM
> The result was as expected, ip_vs_ftp was not loaded.
> All patches below was loaded. (included the ipvs NULL check)
> Just for "fun" I also added a printk in the ipvs NULL check
> but I can't trigger it.
> do you have any possibility to test it or give me a hint how to do ?
> (Just to make sure that the patches below will be sufficient)
Julian is correct. I made a hack to the code to force it to fail in
ip_vs_protocol_net_init() right after calling register_ip_vs_proto_netns()
With "netfilter: ipvs: Verify that IP_VS protocol has been registered"
applied I think that you could implement the same "test" by jumping to
cleanup after the first call to register_ip_vs_proto_netns() in the for
In my test all components of IPVS were compiled into the kernel,
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html