All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
To: network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com>,
	Ying Xue <ying.xue@windriver.com>, Shuang Li <shuali@redhat.com>,
	Hoang Le <hoang.h.le@dektech.com.au>
Subject: [PATCH net] tipc: call tipc_lxc_xmit without holding node_read_lock
Date: Sat,  3 Dec 2022 18:37:21 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5bdd1f8fee9db695cfff4528a48c9b9d0523fb00.1670110641.git.lucien.xin@gmail.com> (raw)

When sending packets between nodes in netns, it calls tipc_lxc_xmit() for
peer node to receive the packets where tipc_sk_mcast_rcv()/tipc_sk_rcv()
might be called, and it's pretty much like in tipc_rcv().

Currently the local 'node rw lock' is held during calling tipc_lxc_xmit()
to protect the peer_net not being freed by another thread. However, when
receiving these packets, tipc_node_add_conn() might be called where the
peer 'node rw lock' is acquired. Then a dead lock warning is triggered by
lockdep detector, although it is not a real dead lock:

    WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
    --------------------------------------------
    conn_server/1086 is trying to acquire lock:
    ffff8880065cb020 (&n->lock#2){++--}-{2:2}, \
                     at: tipc_node_add_conn.cold.76+0xaa/0x211 [tipc]

    but task is already holding lock:
    ffff8880065cd020 (&n->lock#2){++--}-{2:2}, \
                     at: tipc_node_xmit+0x285/0xb30 [tipc]

    other info that might help us debug this:
     Possible unsafe locking scenario:

           CPU0
           ----
      lock(&n->lock#2);
      lock(&n->lock#2);

     *** DEADLOCK ***

     May be due to missing lock nesting notation

    4 locks held by conn_server/1086:
     #0: ffff8880036d1e40 (sk_lock-AF_TIPC){+.+.}-{0:0}, \
                          at: tipc_accept+0x9c0/0x10b0 [tipc]
     #1: ffff8880036d5f80 (sk_lock-AF_TIPC/1){+.+.}-{0:0}, \
                          at: tipc_accept+0x363/0x10b0 [tipc]
     #2: ffff8880065cd020 (&n->lock#2){++--}-{2:2}, \
                          at: tipc_node_xmit+0x285/0xb30 [tipc]
     #3: ffff888012e13370 (slock-AF_TIPC){+...}-{2:2}, \
                          at: tipc_sk_rcv+0x2da/0x1b40 [tipc]

    Call Trace:
     <TASK>
     dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x5b
     __lock_acquire.cold.77+0x1f2/0x3d7
     lock_acquire+0x1d2/0x610
     _raw_write_lock_bh+0x38/0x80
     tipc_node_add_conn.cold.76+0xaa/0x211 [tipc]
     tipc_sk_finish_conn+0x21e/0x640 [tipc]
     tipc_sk_filter_rcv+0x147b/0x3030 [tipc]
     tipc_sk_rcv+0xbb4/0x1b40 [tipc]
     tipc_lxc_xmit+0x225/0x26b [tipc]
     tipc_node_xmit.cold.82+0x4a/0x102 [tipc]
     __tipc_sendstream+0x879/0xff0 [tipc]
     tipc_accept+0x966/0x10b0 [tipc]
     do_accept+0x37d/0x590

This patch avoids this warning by not holding the 'node rw lock' before
calling tipc_lxc_xmit(). As to protect the 'peer_net', rcu_read_lock()
should be enough, as in cleanup_net() when freeing the netns, it calls
synchronize_rcu() before the free is continued.

Also since tipc_lxc_xmit() is like the RX path in tipc_rcv(), it makes
sense to call it under rcu_read_lock(). Note that the right lock order
must be:

   rcu_read_lock();
   tipc_node_read_lock(n);
   tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
   tipc_lxc_xmit();
   rcu_read_unlock();

instead of:

   tipc_node_read_lock(n);
   rcu_read_lock();
   tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
   tipc_lxc_xmit();
   rcu_read_unlock();

and we have to call tipc_node_read_lock/unlock() twice in
tipc_node_xmit().

Fixes: f73b12812a3d ("tipc: improve throughput between nodes in netns")
Reported-by: Shuang Li <shuali@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
---
 net/tipc/node.c | 12 +++++++++---
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/tipc/node.c b/net/tipc/node.c
index b48d97cbbe29..49ddc484c4fe 100644
--- a/net/tipc/node.c
+++ b/net/tipc/node.c
@@ -1689,6 +1689,7 @@ int tipc_node_xmit(struct net *net, struct sk_buff_head *list,
 	struct tipc_node *n;
 	struct sk_buff_head xmitq;
 	bool node_up = false;
+	struct net *peer_net;
 	int bearer_id;
 	int rc;
 
@@ -1705,18 +1706,23 @@ int tipc_node_xmit(struct net *net, struct sk_buff_head *list,
 		return -EHOSTUNREACH;
 	}
 
+	rcu_read_lock();
 	tipc_node_read_lock(n);
 	node_up = node_is_up(n);
-	if (node_up && n->peer_net && check_net(n->peer_net)) {
+	peer_net = n->peer_net;
+	tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
+	if (node_up && peer_net && check_net(peer_net)) {
 		/* xmit inner linux container */
-		tipc_lxc_xmit(n->peer_net, list);
+		tipc_lxc_xmit(peer_net, list);
 		if (likely(skb_queue_empty(list))) {
-			tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
+			rcu_read_unlock();
 			tipc_node_put(n);
 			return 0;
 		}
 	}
+	rcu_read_unlock();
 
+	tipc_node_read_lock(n);
 	bearer_id = n->active_links[selector & 1];
 	if (unlikely(bearer_id == INVALID_BEARER_ID)) {
 		tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
-- 
2.31.1


             reply	other threads:[~2022-12-03 23:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-03 23:37 Xin Long [this message]
2022-12-07 10:50 ` [PATCH net] tipc: call tipc_lxc_xmit without holding node_read_lock patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=5bdd1f8fee9db695cfff4528a48c9b9d0523fb00.1670110641.git.lucien.xin@gmail.com \
    --to=lucien.xin@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=hoang.h.le@dektech.com.au \
    --cc=jmaloy@redhat.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=shuali@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.