All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dean Jenkins <Dean_Jenkins@mentor.com>
To: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
Cc: "Gustavo F. Padovan" <gustavo@padovan.org>,
	Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
	<linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC V1 00/16] hci_ldisc hci_uart_tty_close() fixes
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 16:09:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ee49f939-1094-0ae0-0fa7-6c5cad112527@mentor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AA3DD0DD-5CAC-4ADD-9B0C-4E652C93E4D6@holtmann.org>

Hi Marcel,

On 30/03/17 11:11, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Dean,
>
>> This is RFC patchset V1 which reorganises hci_uart_tty_close() to overcome a
>> design flaw. I would like some comments on the changes.
>>
>> Design Flaw
>> ===========
>>
>> An example callstack is as follows
>>
>> Have Bluetooth running using a BCSP based UART Bluetooth Radio Module.
>>
>> Now kill the userland hciattach program by doing
>> killall hciattach
> is there any chance we can convert BCSP support to run fully inside the kernel with the new parts we have put in. And with that then also use btattach. The split of some parts of BCSP in userspace seems never been a good idea.

I am not aware of "the new parts we [you] have put in" to the kernel 
because I am working with the older 3.14 kernel with userland components 
that are not Bluez based but the kernel issue is observable. Is there a 
web page where I can find out about your design changes for the new parts ?

My efforts are to improve the latest upstream kernel to eliminate this 
kernel design flaw in HCI UART LDISC (Note TTY LDISC is also broken but 
not fixed by my patchset).

I see that "btattach" is at 
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/bluetooth/bluez.git/tree/tools/btattach.c, 
however, I am unable to identify whether Linux distributions such as 
Ubuntu have a bluez package that contains "btattach". Is "btattach" a 
replacement for "hciattach" ?


>
> I am a bit reluctant to change major hci_ldisc pieces because of just one broken protocol. Running BCSP fully in the kernel seems a better solution to deal with some of these issues.

The kernel BCSP software in the kernel is not broken although it is not 
fully implemented as you already highlighted. The issue is that HCI UART 
LDISC (and TTY LDISC) has a broken procedure for closing down the HCI 
UART device via hci_uart_tty_close().

This means that I don't see how your suggestion helps to resolve the 
kernel design flaw which is related to closing down any of the Bluetooth 
Data Link protocol layers such as H4, H5, and BCSP (I use BCSP). This 
flaw seems to me to be a long standing Bluetooth kernel Data Link 
protocol layer closedown issue and is unrelated to how the Data Link 
protocol layer is established (connected). Therefore, having BCSP partly 
in userland is irrelevant to this kernel design flaw. Even with BCSP 
fully in the kernel, the protocol closedown issue will remain present I 
think.

I might try to build "btattach" and have a go to use it. If you look 
inside the source code of "btattach" and "hciattach" you can see the 
problem area in closing down an established Bluetooth Data Link protocol 
layer by the use of:

     if (ioctl(fd, TIOCSETD, &ldisc) < 0) {
         perror("Failed set serial line discipline");
         close(fd);
         return -1;
     }

This userland call is the problem area as this asynchronous ioctl 
TIOCSETD can cause hci_uart_tty_close() to run and I think it can cause 
trouble for ALL the Bluetooth Data Link protocol layers such as H4, H5 
and BCSP.

The design flaw is exposed after the Data Link protocol layer has been 
established (connected) and ioctl TIOCSETD is used from userland. In my 
example, I killed "hciattach" which is an abnormal scenario but it still 
needs good handling. I think I have strace evidence of TIOCSETD being 
used due to SIGTERM.

The design flaw is because TIOCSETD can trigger the sending of a HCI 
RESET command during closedown of HCI UART LDISC, TTY LDISC and the Data 
Link protocol layer. I only have experience of BCSP but I suspect H4 and 
H5 have retransmission procedures similar to BCSP so would also be 
susceptible to this issue of trying to send a HCI RESET command whilst 
closing down the needed data path to the UART driver which causes 
sending of the HCI RESET command to be unsuccessful.

I think the callstack is:

Userland ioctl TIOCSETD executes causing =>
Kernel ioctl system call which runs
tty_ioctl()
tiocsetd()
tty_set_ldisc()
tty_ldisc_close()
hci_uart_tty_close()
hci_unregister_dev()
hci_dev_do_close()
__hci_req_sync() which tries to send a HCI RESET command which depends on
HCI_QUIRK_RESET_ON_CLOSE being enabled and that is the default condition

I believe It will affect the closure of any of the Bluetooth Data Link 
protocol layers.

Note that not enabling HCI_QUIRK_RESET_ON_CLOSE does not fully help 
because if Data Link protocol layer retransmissions are occurring when 
hci_uart_tty_close() runs then the various race conditions are still 
present in hci_uart_tty_close().

I suspect evidence of the design flaw can be observed by measuring the 
execution time of the userland ioctl TIOCSETD calls. I predict that 
sometimes it will take 2 seconds for TIOCSETD to complete due to being 
blocked waiting for the unsuccessful attempt at sending the HCI RESET 
command because the HCI command time-out expires. I believe this will be 
independent of the underlying Bluetooth Data Link protocol layer.

Do you have any suggestions for moving forward in accepting my proposed 
changes ? I will try to provide more observable evidence of the issue on 
kernel v.4.10 on a Linux PC.

Thanks for your time in looking at my proposed patches.

Best regards,
Dean

-- 
Dean Jenkins
Embedded Software Engineer
Linux Transportation Solutions
Mentor Embedded Software Division
Mentor Graphics (UK) Ltd.

  reply	other threads:[~2017-04-03 15:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-28 17:50 Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 01/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Add missing return in hci_uart_init_work() Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 02/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Ensure hu->hdev set to NULL before freeing hdev Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 03/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Add missing clear HCI_UART_PROTO_READY Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 04/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Add HCI RESET comment to hci_unregister_dev() call Dean Jenkins
2017-03-30 10:11   ` Marcel Holtmann
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 05/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Add protocol check to hci_uart_send_frame() Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 06/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Add protocol check to hci_uart_dequeue() Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 07/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Add protocol check to hci_uart_tx_wakeup() Dean Jenkins
2017-03-30 10:11   ` Marcel Holtmann
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 08/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Separate flag handling in hci_uart_tty_close() Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 09/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Tidy-up HCI_UART_REGISTERED " Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 10/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: hci_uart_tty_close() detach tty after last msg Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 11/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: hci_uart_tty_close() move hci_uart_close() Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 12/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: hci_uart_tty_close() move cancel_work_sync() Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 13/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: hci_uart_tty_close() free hu->tx_skb Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 14/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Simplify flushing Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 15/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Use rwlocking to avoid closing proto races Dean Jenkins
2017-03-28 17:50 ` [RFC V1 16/16] Bluetooth: hci_ldisc: Add ioctl_mutex avoiding concurrency Dean Jenkins
2017-03-30 10:11 ` [RFC V1 00/16] hci_ldisc hci_uart_tty_close() fixes Marcel Holtmann
2017-04-03 15:09   ` Dean Jenkins [this message]
2017-04-03 15:51     ` Marcel Holtmann
2017-04-04 20:36       ` Dean Jenkins
2017-04-05 15:28         ` Dean Jenkins
2017-04-06  7:23           ` Marcel Holtmann

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=ee49f939-1094-0ae0-0fa7-6c5cad112527@mentor.com \
    --to=dean_jenkins@mentor.com \
    --cc=gustavo@padovan.org \
    --cc=johan.hedberg@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
    --subject='Re: [RFC V1 00/16] hci_ldisc hci_uart_tty_close() fixes' \
    /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

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.