| Message ID | 20081011111711.GA2808@ami.dom.local |
|---|---|
| State | Rejected, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote: > pkt_sched: cls_u32: Fix locking in u32_delete() > > While looking for a possible reason of bugzilla [Bug 11571] > "u32_classify Kernel Panic" reported by m0sia@plotinka.ru I found that > tcf_tree_lock() is missing in u32_delete() during u32_destroy_hnode() > call. Other paths calling this function use this lock. It haven't been > acknowledged this fixes the bug, but I think this patch is needed here > anyway. > > Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> > > --- > > net/sched/cls_u32.c | 2 ++ > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/sched/cls_u32.c b/net/sched/cls_u32.c > index 246f906..9912ad5 100644 > --- a/net/sched/cls_u32.c > +++ b/net/sched/cls_u32.c > @@ -433,7 +433,9 @@ static int u32_delete(struct tcf_proto *tp, unsigned long arg) > > if (ht->refcnt == 1) { > ht->refcnt--; > + tcf_tree_lock(tp); > u32_destroy_hnode(tp, ht); > + tcf_tree_unlock(tp); Well if you were going to protect you'd need to lock before the reference count check. However, this is actually unecessary because the reference count can only be increased the RTNL which we're already holding. Also, if the reference count is 1, then there must be no live references in the system to the hash table so we can safely delete it. So whatever the problem is this isn't it :) Cheers,
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:10:22 +0800 > Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> wrote: > > pkt_sched: cls_u32: Fix locking in u32_delete() > > > > While looking for a possible reason of bugzilla [Bug 11571] > > "u32_classify Kernel Panic" reported by m0sia@plotinka.ru I found that > > tcf_tree_lock() is missing in u32_delete() during u32_destroy_hnode() > > call. Other paths calling this function use this lock. It haven't been > > acknowledged this fixes the bug, but I think this patch is needed here > > anyway. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> > > > > --- > > > > net/sched/cls_u32.c | 2 ++ > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/net/sched/cls_u32.c b/net/sched/cls_u32.c > > index 246f906..9912ad5 100644 > > --- a/net/sched/cls_u32.c > > +++ b/net/sched/cls_u32.c > > @@ -433,7 +433,9 @@ static int u32_delete(struct tcf_proto *tp, unsigned long arg) > > > > if (ht->refcnt == 1) { > > ht->refcnt--; > > + tcf_tree_lock(tp); > > u32_destroy_hnode(tp, ht); > > + tcf_tree_unlock(tp); > > Well if you were going to protect you'd need to lock before the > reference count check. However, this is actually unecessary > because the reference count can only be increased the RTNL which > we're already holding. > > Also, if the reference count is 1, then there must be no live > references in the system to the hash table so we can safely > delete it. > > So whatever the problem is this isn't it :) Agreed, the synchronization is already what is necessary here. As Herbert stated, the refcounts only change under RTNL and when we see it hit 0 we can be sure we are the only reference to it. Next, my understanding is that: 1) tc_h_common is a per sched tree object 2) we quiesced the whole sched tree, from the root, before getting to this code Which means that the hash list deletion in u32_destroy_hnode() is safe as well. But hey, we could be missing something here, so I'd be happy to hear that Jarek can still see some hole here :) Because it is true that we have seen some weird crashes still and u32 seems common amongst those report. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 12:24:00PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> > Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 22:10:22 +0800 ... > But hey, we could be missing something here, so I'd be happy to > hear that Jarek can still see some hole here :) Because it is true > that we have seen some weird crashes still and u32 seems common > amongst those report. > Yes, you could be missing something, but I've forgotten what, because when I found this I was much younger and brighter... and alas now I've a busy weekend, so let it wait until monday. Thanks you both for looking at this, Jarek P. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 00:04:18 +0200 > Yes, you could be missing something, but I've forgotten what, because > when I found this I was much younger and brighter... and alas now I've > a busy weekend, so let it wait until monday. You euros and your "weekends". :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 12-10-2008 00:05, David Miller wrote: > From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> > Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2008 00:04:18 +0200 > >> Yes, you could be missing something, but I've forgotten what, because >> when I found this I was much younger and brighter... and alas now I've >> a busy weekend, so let it wait until monday. OK, I give up! You both didn't miss anything and this patch is useless. > You euros and your "weekends". :-) I wish you were right with this too... Thanks again, Jarek P. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/net/sched/cls_u32.c b/net/sched/cls_u32.c index 246f906..9912ad5 100644 --- a/net/sched/cls_u32.c +++ b/net/sched/cls_u32.c @@ -433,7 +433,9 @@ static int u32_delete(struct tcf_proto *tp, unsigned long arg) if (ht->refcnt == 1) { ht->refcnt--; + tcf_tree_lock(tp); u32_destroy_hnode(tp, ht); + tcf_tree_unlock(tp); } else { return -EBUSY; }
pkt_sched: cls_u32: Fix locking in u32_delete() While looking for a possible reason of bugzilla [Bug 11571] "u32_classify Kernel Panic" reported by m0sia@plotinka.ru I found that tcf_tree_lock() is missing in u32_delete() during u32_destroy_hnode() call. Other paths calling this function use this lock. It haven't been acknowledged this fixes the bug, but I think this patch is needed here anyway. Signed-off-by: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com> --- net/sched/cls_u32.c | 2 ++ 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html