All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hoang Huu Le <hoang.h.le@dektech.com.au>
To: Niels Dossche <dossche.niels@gmail.com>,
	"tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net" 
	<tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com>, Ying Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net] tipc: use a write lock for keepalive_intv instead of a read lock
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2022 03:09:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <VE1PR05MB7327B86C1D232BE0B31CA248F11F9@VE1PR05MB7327.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220329161213.93576-1-dossche.niels@gmail.com>

Hi Niels,

I did consider this function however I guess it is safe to use  tipc_node_read_lock()/unlock() since this value is being apply in this callback function. 

BTW, you must be using tipc_node_write_unlock_fast() instead of tipc_node_write_unlock().
Regards,
Hoang
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Niels Dossche <dossche.niels@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 11:12 PM
> To: tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com>; Ying Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>; David S. Miller
> <davem@davemloft.net>; Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>; Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>; Hoang Huu Le
> <hoang.h.le@dektech.com.au>; Niels Dossche <dossche.niels@gmail.com>
> Subject: [PATCH net] tipc: use a write lock for keepalive_intv instead of a read lock
> 
> Currently, n->keepalive_intv is written to while n is locked by a read
> lock instead of a write lock. This seems to me to break the atomicity
> against other readers.
> Change this to a write lock instead to solve the issue.
> 
> Note:
> I am currently working on a static analyser to detect missing locks
> using type-based static analysis as my master's thesis
> in order to obtain my master's degree.
> If you would like to have more details, please let me know.
> This was a reported case. I manually verified the report by looking
> at the code, so that I do not send wrong information or patches.
> After concluding that this seems to be a true positive, I created
> this patch. I have both compile-tested this patch and runtime-tested
> this patch on x86_64. The effect on a running system could be a
> potential race condition in exceptional cases.
> This issue was found on Linux v5.17.
> 
> Fixes: f5d6c3e5a359 ("tipc: fix node keep alive interval calculation")
> Signed-off-by: Niels Dossche <dossche.niels@gmail.com>
> ---
>  net/tipc/node.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/tipc/node.c b/net/tipc/node.c
> index 6ef95ce565bd..da867ddb93f5 100644
> --- a/net/tipc/node.c
> +++ b/net/tipc/node.c
> @@ -806,9 +806,9 @@ static void tipc_node_timeout(struct timer_list *t)
>  	/* Initial node interval to value larger (10 seconds), then it will be
>  	 * recalculated with link lowest tolerance
>  	 */
> -	tipc_node_read_lock(n);
> +	tipc_node_write_lock(n);
>  	n->keepalive_intv = 10000;
> -	tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
> +	tipc_node_write_unlock(n);
>  	for (bearer_id = 0; remains && (bearer_id < MAX_BEARERS); bearer_id++) {
>  		tipc_node_read_lock(n);
>  		le = &n->links[bearer_id];
> --
> 2.35.1


  reply	other threads:[~2022-03-30  3:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-03-29 16:12 [PATCH net] tipc: use a write lock for keepalive_intv instead of a read lock Niels Dossche
2022-03-30  3:09 ` Hoang Huu Le [this message]
2022-03-31  5:48 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-03-31 14:28 ` Paolo Abeni
2022-03-31 16:54   ` Jon Maloy
2022-03-31 17:59     ` Niels Dossche

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=VE1PR05MB7327B86C1D232BE0B31CA248F11F9@VE1PR05MB7327.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=hoang.h.le@dektech.com.au \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dossche.niels@gmail.com \
    --cc=jmaloy@redhat.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=ying.xue@windriver.com \
    /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.