All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@redhat.com>
To: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 4/4] sockets: Handle race condition between binds to the same port
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 13:49:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170626124922.GO495@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1498480368.3341.43.camel@oracle.com>

On Mon, Jun 26, 2017 at 02:32:48PM +0200, Knut Omang wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-06-26 at 11:22 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 12:31:08PM +0200, Knut Omang wrote:
> > > If an offset of ports is specified to the inet_listen_saddr function(),
> > > and two or more processes tries to bind from these ports at the same time,
> > > occasionally more than one process may be able to bind to the same
> > > port. The condition is detected by listen() but too late to avoid a failure.
> > > 
> > > This function is called by socket_listen() and used
> > > by all socket listening code in QEMU, so all cases where any form of dynamic
> > > port selection is used should be subject to this issue.
> > > 
> > > Add code to close and re-establish the socket when this
> > > condition is observed, hiding the race condition from the user.
> > > 
> > > This has been developed and tested by means of the
> > > test-listen unit test in the previous commit.
> > > Enable the test for make check now that it passes.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Knut Omang <knut.omang@oracle.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Bhavesh Davda <bhavesh.davda@oracle.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Yuval Shaia <yuval.shaia@oracle.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Girish Moodalbail <girish.moodalbail@oracle.com>
> > > ---
> > >  tests/Makefile.include |  2 +-
> > >  util/qemu-sockets.c    | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > >  2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/tests/Makefile.include b/tests/Makefile.include
> > > index 22bb97e..c38f94e 100644
> > > --- a/tests/Makefile.include
> > > +++ b/tests/Makefile.include
> > > @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ check-unit-y += tests/test-bufferiszero$(EXESUF)
> > >  gcov-files-check-bufferiszero-y = util/bufferiszero.c
> > >  check-unit-y += tests/test-uuid$(EXESUF)
> > >  check-unit-y += tests/ptimer-test$(EXESUF)
> > > -#check-unit-y += tests/test-listen$(EXESUF)
> > > +check-unit-y += tests/test-listen$(EXESUF)
> > >  gcov-files-ptimer-test-y = hw/core/ptimer.c
> > >  check-unit-y += tests/test-qapi-util$(EXESUF)
> > >  gcov-files-test-qapi-util-y = qapi/qapi-util.c
> > > diff --git a/util/qemu-sockets.c b/util/qemu-sockets.c
> > > index 48b9319..7b118b4 100644
> > > --- a/util/qemu-sockets.c
> > > +++ b/util/qemu-sockets.c
> > > @@ -201,6 +201,42 @@ static int try_bind(int socket, InetSocketAddress *saddr, struct
> > addrinfo *e)
> > >  #endif
> > >  }
> > >  
> > > +static int try_bind_listen(int *socket, InetSocketAddress *saddr,
> > > +                           struct addrinfo *e, int port, Error **errp)
> > > +{
> > > +    int s = *socket;
> > > +    int ret;
> > > +
> > > +    inet_setport(e, port);
> > > +    ret = try_bind(s, saddr, e);
> > > +    if (ret) {
> > > +        if (errno != EADDRINUSE) {
> > > +            error_setg_errno(errp, errno, "Failed to bind socket");
> > > +        }
> > > +        return errno;
> > > +    }
> > > +    if (listen(s, 1) == 0) {
> > > +            return 0;
> > > +    }
> > > +    if (errno == EADDRINUSE) {
> > > +        /* We got to bind the socket to a port but someone else managed
> > > +         * to bind to the same port and beat us to listen on it!
> > > +         * Recreate the socket and return EADDRINUSE to preserve the
> > > +         * expected state by the caller:
> > > +         */
> > > +        closesocket(s);
> > > +        s = create_fast_reuse_socket(e, errp);
> > > +        if (s < 0) {
> > > +            return errno;
> > > +        }
> > > +        *socket = s;
> > 
> > I don't really like this at all - if we need to close + recreate the
> > socket, IMHO that should remain the job of the caller, since it owns
> > the socket FD ultimately.
> 
> Normally I would agree, but this is a very unlikely situation. I considered moving the
> complexity out to the caller, even to recreate for every call, but found those solutions
> to be inferior as they do not in any way confine the problem, and cause the handling of
> the common cases to be much less readable. It's going to be some trade-offs here.
> 
> As long as the caller is aware of (by the reference call) that the socket in use may
> change, this is in my view a clean (as clean as possible) abstraction that simplifies the
> logic at the next level. My intention is to make the common, good case as readable as
> possible and hide some of the complexity of these 
> unlikely error scenarios inside the new functions - divide and conquer..
> 
> > 
> > > +        errno = EADDRINUSE;
> > > +        return errno;
> > > +    }
> > > +    error_setg_errno(errp, errno, "Failed to listen on socket");
> > > +    return errno;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > >  static int inet_listen_saddr(InetSocketAddress *saddr,
> > >                               int port_offset,
> > >                               bool update_addr,
> > > @@ -210,7 +246,9 @@ static int inet_listen_saddr(InetSocketAddress *saddr,
> > >      char port[33];
> > >      char uaddr[INET6_ADDRSTRLEN+1];
> > >      char uport[33];
> > > -    int slisten, rc, port_min, port_max, p;
> > > +    int rc, port_min, port_max, p;
> > > +    int slisten = 0;
> > > +    int saved_errno = 0;
> > >      Error *err = NULL;
> > >  
> > >      memset(&ai,0, sizeof(ai));
> > > @@ -276,28 +314,26 @@ static int inet_listen_saddr(InetSocketAddress *saddr,
> > 
> > Just above this line is the original 'create_fast_reuse_socket' call.
> > 
> > I'd suggest that we push that call down into the body of the loop
> > below:
> > 
> > >          port_min = inet_getport(e);
> > >          port_max = saddr->has_to ? saddr->to + port_offset : port_min;
> > >          for (p = port_min; p <= port_max; p++) {
> > > -            inet_setport(e, p);
> > > -            if (try_bind(slisten, saddr, e) >= 0) {
> > > -                goto listen;
> > > -            }
> > > -            if (p == port_max) {
> > > -                if (!e->ai_next) {
> > > -                    error_setg_errno(errp, errno, "Failed to bind socket");
> > > -                }
> > > +            int eno = try_bind_listen(&slisten, saddr, e, p, &err);
> > 
> > Which would mean try_bind_listen no longer needs the magic to close +
> > recreate the socket.
> > 
> > The only cost of doing this is that you end up closing + recreating the
> > socket after bind hits EADDRINUSE, as well as after listen() hits it.
> 
> The problem with this approach in my opinion is that one has to understand the
> fix for the problem I am trying to solve here in order to read the main code, 
> even though this is a very special case. Everyone reading the code would ask themselves
> the question 'why do they recreate the socket here?' and then be forced to ready the
> details of try_bind_listen anyway, or we would need additional comments.

That's easily solved by adding a comment

  /* We recreate the socket FD on each iteration because
     if bind succeeds & listen fails, we can't bind
     again on the same socket FD */

> The idea behind the abstractions I have used here is to hide the details inside functions,
> but leave them with an as clean as possible (although not ideal) interface that 
> makes the overall logic more readable.

I think the result is actually harder to understand, because of the
peculiar way the function closes & reopens the socket FD belonging
to the caller, and the error handling is really very unclear and
buggy as a result too.

> > I think that's acceptable tradeoff for simpler code, since this is not
> > a performance critical operation.
> 
> Also should we perhaps worry about any side effects of creating and closing a lot of
> sockets unnecessary?

What side effects ? I don't think there are any - since this is server
side, not client side, we're not leaving any state around in timed waits
or similar.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|

  reply	other threads:[~2017-06-26 12:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-23 10:31 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 0/4] Unit test+fix for problem with QEMU handling of multiple bind()s to the same port Knut Omang
2017-06-23 10:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 1/4] tests: Add test-listen - a stress test for QEMU socket listen Knut Omang
2017-06-23 10:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 2/4] sockets: factor out create_fast_reuse_socket Knut Omang
2017-06-26 10:28   ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-06-26 11:56     ` Knut Omang
2017-06-26 12:00       ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-07-02  6:26     ` Knut Omang
2017-06-23 10:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 3/4] sockets: factor out a new try_bind() function Knut Omang
2017-06-23 10:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 4/4] sockets: Handle race condition between binds to the same port Knut Omang
2017-06-26 10:22   ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-06-26 12:32     ` Knut Omang
2017-06-26 12:49       ` Daniel P. Berrange [this message]
2017-07-02  8:17         ` Knut Omang
2017-06-26 10:34   ` Daniel P. Berrange
2017-07-02  8:15     ` Knut Omang

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=20170626124922.GO495@redhat.com \
    --to=berrange@redhat.com \
    --cc=knut.omang@oracle.com \
    --cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.