From: Igor Ryzhov <iryzhov@nfware.com>
To: Elad Nachman <eladv6@gmail.com>
Cc: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>,
dev <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] kni: fix rtnl deadlocks and race conditions v3
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 15:49:49 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAF+s_Fza_63+4jL9anOEuBPgt+0WdicaWu9JfUOmr3vK-Qkr2Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210223134504.699-1-eladv6@gmail.com>
This looks more like a hack than an actual fix to me.
After this commit:
"ip link set up" is sent to the userspace with unlocked rtnl_lock
"ip link set down" is sent to the userspace with locked rtnl_lock
How is this really fixing anything? IMHO it only complicates the code.
If talking with userspace under rtnl_lock is a problem, then we should fix
all such requests, not only part of them.
If it is not a problem, then I don't see any point in merging this.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 4:45 PM Elad Nachman <eladv6@gmail.com> wrote:
> This part of the series includes my fixes for the issues reported
> by Ferruh and Igor on top of part 1 of the patch series:
>
> A. KNI sync lock is being locked while rtnl is held.
> If two threads are calling kni_net_process_request() ,
> then the first one will take the sync lock, release rtnl lock then sleep.
> The second thread will try to lock sync lock while holding rtnl.
> The first thread will wake, and try to lock rtnl, resulting in a deadlock.
> The remedy is to release rtnl before locking the KNI sync lock.
> Since in between nothing is accessing Linux network-wise,
> no rtnl locking is needed.
>
> B. There is a race condition in __dev_close_many() processing the
> close_list while the application terminates.
> It looks like if two vEth devices are terminating,
> and one releases the rtnl lock, the other takes it,
> updating the close_list in an unstable state,
> causing the close_list to become a circular linked list,
> hence list_for_each_entry() will endlessly loop inside
> __dev_close_many() .
> Since the description for the original patch indicate the
> original motivation was bringing the device up,
> I have changed kni_net_process_request() to hold the rtnl mutex
> in case of bringing the device down since this is the path called
> from __dev_close_many() , causing the corruption of the close_list.
>
> Signed-off-by: Elad Nachman <eladv6@gmail.com>
> ---
> v3:
> * Include original patch and new patch as a series of patch, added a
> comment to the new patch
> v2:
> * rebuild the patch as increment from patch 64106
> * fix comment and blank lines
> ---
> kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c b/kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c
> index f0b6e9a8d..017e44812 100644
> --- a/kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c
> +++ b/kernel/linux/kni/kni_net.c
> @@ -110,9 +110,26 @@ kni_net_process_request(struct net_device *dev,
> struct rte_kni_request *req)
> void *resp_va;
> uint32_t num;
> int ret_val;
> + int req_is_dev_stop = 0;
> +
> + /* For configuring the interface to down,
> + * rtnl must be held all the way to prevent race condition
> + * inside __dev_close_many() between two netdev instances of KNI
> + */
> + if (req->req_id == RTE_KNI_REQ_CFG_NETWORK_IF &&
> + req->if_up == 0)
> + req_is_dev_stop = 1;
>
> ASSERT_RTNL();
>
> + /* Since we need to wait and RTNL mutex is held
> + * drop the mutex and hold reference to keep device
> + */
> + if (!req_is_dev_stop) {
> + dev_hold(dev);
> + rtnl_unlock();
> + }
> +
> mutex_lock(&kni->sync_lock);
>
> /* Construct data */
> @@ -124,16 +141,8 @@ kni_net_process_request(struct net_device *dev,
> struct rte_kni_request *req)
> goto fail;
> }
>
> - /* Since we need to wait and RTNL mutex is held
> - * drop the mutex and hold refernce to keep device
> - */
> - dev_hold(dev);
> - rtnl_unlock();
> -
> ret_val = wait_event_interruptible_timeout(kni->wq,
> kni_fifo_count(kni->resp_q), 3 * HZ);
> - rtnl_lock();
> - dev_put(dev);
>
> if (signal_pending(current) || ret_val <= 0) {
> ret = -ETIME;
> @@ -152,6 +161,10 @@ kni_net_process_request(struct net_device *dev,
> struct rte_kni_request *req)
>
> fail:
> mutex_unlock(&kni->sync_lock);
> + if (!req_is_dev_stop) {
> + rtnl_lock();
> + dev_put(dev);
> + }
> return ret;
> }
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-24 12:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-26 14:46 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] kni: fix rtnl deadlocks and race conditions Elad Nachman
2021-02-19 18:41 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-02-21 8:03 ` Elad Nachman
2021-02-22 15:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-02-23 12:05 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH V2] kni: fix rtnl deadlocks and race conditions v2 Elad Nachman
2021-02-23 12:53 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-02-23 13:44 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] kni: fix rtnl deadlocks and race conditions v3 Elad Nachman
2021-02-23 13:45 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] " Elad Nachman
2021-02-24 12:49 ` Igor Ryzhov [this message]
2021-02-24 13:33 ` Elad Nachman
2021-02-24 14:04 ` Igor Ryzhov
2021-02-24 14:06 ` Elad Nachman
2021-02-24 14:41 ` Igor Ryzhov
2021-02-24 14:56 ` Elad Nachman
2021-02-24 15:18 ` Igor Ryzhov
[not found] ` <CACXF7qkhkzFc-=v=iiBzh2V7rLjk1U34VUfPbNrnYJND_0TKHQ@mail.gmail.com>
2021-02-24 16:31 ` Igor Ryzhov
2021-02-24 15:54 ` Stephen Hemminger
2021-02-25 14:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] kni: fix kernel deadlock when using mlx devices Elad Nachman
2021-02-25 14:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] kni: fix rtnl deadlocks and race conditions v4 Elad Nachman
2021-02-25 21:01 ` Igor Ryzhov
2021-02-26 15:48 ` Stephen Hemminger
2021-02-26 17:43 ` Elad Nachman
2021-03-01 8:10 ` Igor Ryzhov
2021-03-01 16:38 ` Stephen Hemminger
2021-03-15 16:58 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-01 20:27 ` Dan Gora
2021-03-01 21:26 ` Dan Gora
2021-03-02 16:44 ` Elad Nachman
2021-03-15 17:17 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-16 18:35 ` Elad Nachman
2021-03-16 18:42 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-15 17:17 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] kni: fix kernel deadlock when using mlx devices Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-29 14:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/3] kni: refactor user request processing Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-29 14:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/3] kni: support async user request Ferruh Yigit
2021-03-29 14:36 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/3] kni: fix kernel deadlock when using mlx devices Ferruh Yigit
2021-04-09 14:56 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Ferruh Yigit
2021-04-12 14:35 ` Elad Nachman
2021-04-20 23:07 ` Thomas Monjalon
2021-04-23 8:41 ` Igor Ryzhov
2021-04-23 8:59 ` Ferruh Yigit
2021-04-23 12:43 ` Igor Ryzhov
2021-04-23 12:58 ` Igor Ryzhov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAF+s_Fza_63+4jL9anOEuBPgt+0WdicaWu9JfUOmr3vK-Qkr2Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=iryzhov@nfware.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=eladv6@gmail.com \
--cc=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).