linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>
To: Alexander H Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
	Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: page_pool: fix refcounting issues with fragmented allocation
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2023 20:40:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <301aa48a-eb3b-eb56-5041-d6f8d61024d1@nbd.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9992e7b5-7f2b-b79d-9c48-cf689807f185@nbd.name>

On 25.01.23 20:10, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> On 25.01.23 20:02, Alexander H Duyck wrote:
>> On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 19:42 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>>> On 25.01.23 19:26, Alexander H Duyck wrote:
>>> > On Wed, 2023-01-25 at 18:32 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>>> > > On 25.01.23 18:11, Alexander H Duyck wrote:
>>> > > > On Tue, 2023-01-24 at 22:30 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>>> > > > > On 24.01.23 22:10, Alexander H Duyck wrote:
>>> > > > > > On Tue, 2023-01-24 at 18:22 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>>> > > > > > > On 24.01.23 15:11, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
>>> > > > > > > > Hi Felix,
>>> > > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > > > ++cc Alexander and Yunsheng.
>>> > > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > > > Thanks for the report
>>> > > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 14:43, Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name> wrote:
>>> > > > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > > > > While testing fragmented page_pool allocation in the mt76 driver, I was able
>>> > > > > > > > > to reliably trigger page refcount underflow issues, which did not occur with
>>> > > > > > > > > full-page page_pool allocation.
>>> > > > > > > > > It appears to me, that handling refcounting in two separate counters
>>> > > > > > > > > (page->pp_frag_count and page refcount) is racy when page refcount gets
>>> > > > > > > > > incremented by code dealing with skb fragments directly, and
>>> > > > > > > > > page_pool_return_skb_page is called multiple times for the same fragment.
>>> > > > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > > > > Dropping page->pp_frag_count and relying entirely on the page refcount makes
>>> > > > > > > > > these underflow issues and crashes go away.
>>> > > > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > > > This has been discussed here [1].  TL;DR changing this to page
>>> > > > > > > > refcount might blow up in other colorful ways.  Can we look closer and
>>> > > > > > > > figure out why the underflow happens?
>>> > > > > > > I don't see how the approch taken in my patch would blow up. From what I 
>>> > > > > > > can tell, it should be fairly close to how refcount is handled in 
>>> > > > > > > page_frag_alloc. The main improvement it adds is to prevent it from 
>>> > > > > > > blowing up if pool-allocated fragments get shared across multiple skbs 
>>> > > > > > > with corresponding get_page and page_pool_return_skb_page calls.
>>> > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > > - Felix
>>> > > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > 
>>> > > > > > Do you have the patch available to review as an RFC? From what I am
>>> > > > > > seeing it looks like you are underrunning on the pp_frag_count itself.
>>> > > > > > I would suspect the issue to be something like starting with a bad
>>> > > > > > count in terms of the total number of references, or deducing the wrong
>>> > > > > > amount when you finally free the page assuming you are tracking your
>>> > > > > > frag count using a non-atomic value in the driver.
>>> > > > > The driver patches for page pool are here:
>>> > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/64abb23f4867c075c19d704beaae5a0a2f8e8821.1673963374.git.lorenzo@kernel.org/
>>> > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/68081e02cbe2afa2d35c8aa93194f0adddbd0f05.1673963374.git.lorenzo@kernel.org/
>>> > > > > 
>>> > > > > They are also applied in my mt76 tree at:
>>> > > > > https://github.com/nbd168/wireless
>>> > > > > 
>>> > > > > - Felix
>>> > > > 
>>> > > > So one thing I am thinking is that we may be seeing an issue where we
>>> > > > are somehow getting a mix of frag and non-frag based page pool pages.
>>> > > > That is the only case I can think of where we might be underflowing
>>> > > > negative. If you could add some additional debug info on the underflow
>>> > > > WARN_ON case in page_pool_defrag_page that might be useful.
>>> > > > Specifically I would be curious what the actual return value is. I'm
>>> > > > assuming we are only hitting negative 1, but I would want to verify we
>>> > > > aren't seeing something else.
>>> > > I'll try to run some more tests soon. However, I think I found the piece 
>>> > > of code that is incompatible with using pp_frag_count.
>>> > > When receiving an A-MSDU packet (multiple MSDUs within a single 802.11 
>>> > > packet), and it is not split by the hardware, a cfg80211 function 
>>> > > extracts the individual MSDUs into separate skbs. In that case, a 
>>> > > fragment can be shared across multiple skbs, and get_page is used to 
>>> > > increase the refcount.
>>> > > You can find this in net/wireless/util.c: ieee80211_amsdu_to_8023s (and 
>>> > > its helper functions).
>>> > 
>>> > I'm not sure if it is problematic or not. Basically it is trading off
>>> > by copying over the frags, calling get_page on each frag, and then
>>> > using dev_kfree_skb to disassemble and release the pp_frag references.
>>> > There should be other paths in the kernel that are doing something
>>> > similar.
>>> > 
>>> > > This code also has a bug where it doesn't set pp_recycle on the newly 
>>> > > allocated skb if the previous one has it, but that's a separate matter 
>>> > > and fixing it doesn't make the crash go away.
>>> > 
>>> > Adding the recycle would cause this bug. So one thing we might be
>>> > seeing is something like that triggering this error. Specifically if
>>> > the page is taken via get_page when assembling the new skb then we
>>> > cannot set the recycle flag in the new skb otherwise it will result in
>>> > the reference undercount we are seeing. What we are doing is shifting
>>> > the references away from the pp_frag_count to the page reference count
>>> > in this case. If we set the pp_recycle flag then it would cause us to
>>> > decrement pp_frag_count instead of the page reference count resulting
>>> > in the underrun.
>>> Couldn't leaving out the pp_recycle flag potentially lead to a case 
>>> where the last user of the page drops it via page_frag_free instead of 
>>> page_pool_return_skb_page? Is that valid?
>> 
>> No. What will happen is that when the pp_frag_count is exhausted the
>> page will be unmapped and evicted from the page pool. When the page is
>> then finally freed it will end up going back to the page allocator
>> instead of page pool.
>> 
>> Basically the idea is that until pp_frag_count reaches 0 there will be
>> at least 1 page reference held.
>> 
>>> > > Is there any way I can make that part of the code work with the current 
>>> > > page pool frag implementation?
>>> > 
>>> > The current code should work. Basically as long as the references are
>>> > taken w/ get_page and skb->pp_recycle is not set then we shouldn't run
>>> > into this issue because the pp_frag_count will be dropped when the
>>> > original skb is freed and the page reference count will be decremented
>>> > when the new one is freed.
>>> > 
>>> > For page pool page fragments the main thing to keep in mind is that if
>>> > pp_recycle is set it will update the pp_frag_count and if it is not
>>> > then it will just decrement the page reference count.
>>> What takes care of DMA unmap and other cleanup if the last reference to 
>>> the page is dropped via page_frag_free?
>>> 
>>> - Felix
>> 
>> When the page is freed on the skb w/ pp_recycle set it will unmap the
>> page and evict it from the page pool. Basically in these cases the page
>> goes from the page pool back to the page allocator.
>> 
>> The general idea with this is that if we are using fragments that there
>> will be enough of them floating around that if one or two frags have a
>> temporeary detour through a non-recycling path that hopefully by the
>> time the last fragment is freed the other instances holding the
>> additional page reference will have let them go. If not then the page
>> will go back to the page allocator and it will have to be replaced in
>> the page pool.
> Thanks for the explanation, it makes sense to me now. Unfortunately it
> also means that I have no idea what could cause this issue. I will
> finish my mt76 patch rework which gets rid of the pp vs non-pp
> allocation mix and re-run my tests to provide updated traces.
Here's the updated mt76 page pool support commit:
https://github.com/nbd168/wireless/commit/923cdab6d4c92a0acb3536b3b0cc4af9fee7c808

And here is the trace that I'm getting with 6.1:
https://nbd.name/p/a16957f2

If you have any debug patch you'd like me to test, please let me know.

- Felix

  reply	other threads:[~2023-01-25 19:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-01-24 12:43 [PATCH] net: page_pool: fix refcounting issues with fragmented allocation Felix Fietkau
2023-01-24 14:11 ` Ilias Apalodimas
2023-01-24 15:57   ` Alexander H Duyck
2023-01-24 16:59     ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-26 10:31     ` Ilias Apalodimas
2023-01-26 15:41       ` Alexander Duyck
2023-01-26 16:05         ` Ilias Apalodimas
2023-01-24 17:22   ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-24 21:10     ` Alexander H Duyck
2023-01-24 21:30       ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-25 17:11         ` Alexander H Duyck
2023-01-25 17:32           ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-25 18:26             ` Alexander H Duyck
2023-01-25 18:42               ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-25 19:02                 ` Alexander H Duyck
2023-01-25 19:10                   ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-25 19:40                     ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2023-01-25 20:02                       ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-25 22:14                       ` Alexander H Duyck
2023-01-26  6:12                         ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-26  9:14                           ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-26 16:08                             ` Alexander Duyck
2023-01-26 16:40                               ` Alexander Duyck
2023-01-26 17:44                               ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-26 18:38                                 ` Alexander H Duyck
2023-01-26 18:43                                   ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-26 19:06                                     ` [net PATCH] skb: Do mix page pool and page referenced frags in GRO Alexander Duyck
2023-01-26 19:14                                       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2023-01-26 19:48                                         ` Alexander Duyck
2023-01-26 21:35                                           ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2023-01-26 23:13                                       ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-01-27  7:15                                         ` Ilias Apalodimas
2023-01-27  7:21                                         ` Felix Fietkau
2023-01-30 16:49                                         ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2023-01-28  2:37                                       ` Yunsheng Lin
2023-01-28  5:26                                         ` Jakub Kicinski
2023-01-28  7:08                                           ` Eric Dumazet
2023-01-30  8:50                                             ` Paolo Abeni
2023-01-30 16:17                                               ` Alexander Duyck
2023-01-28  7:15                                           ` Eric Dumazet
2023-01-28 17:08                                             ` Alexander Duyck
2023-01-28  7:50                                       ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2023-01-26 10:32     ` [PATCH] net: page_pool: fix refcounting issues with fragmented allocation Ilias Apalodimas

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=301aa48a-eb3b-eb56-5041-d6f8d61024d1@nbd.name \
    --to=nbd@nbd.name \
    --cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linyunsheng@huawei.com \
    --cc=lorenzo@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.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 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).