linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: protect statistics updates with a spinlock

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 11:34:02 +0100
From: Petr Tesařík <petr@...arici.cz>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>, Jose Abreu
 <joabreu@...opsys.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub
 Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Maxime
 Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Jernej
 Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>, Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>,
 "open list:STMMAC ETHERNET DRIVER" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "moderated
 list:ARM/STM32 ARCHITECTURE" <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
 "moderated list:ARM/STM32 ARCHITECTURE"
 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, open list
 <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:ARM/Allwinner sunXi SoC support"
 <linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: protect statistics updates with a spinlock

On Fri, 5 Jan 2024 10:58:42 +0100
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 5, 2024 at 10:16 AM Petr Tesarik <petr@...arici.cz> wrote:
> >
> > Add a spinlock to fix race conditions while updating Tx/Rx statistics.
> >
> > As explained by a comment in <linux/u64_stats_sync.h>, write side of struct
> > u64_stats_sync must ensure mutual exclusion, or one seqcount update could
> > be lost on 32-bit platforms, thus blocking readers forever.
> >
> > Such lockups have been actually observed on 32-bit Arm after stmmac_xmit()
> > on one core raced with stmmac_napi_poll_tx() on another core.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Petr Tesarik <petr@...arici.cz>  
> 
> This is going to add more costs to 64bit platforms ?

Yes, it adds a (hopefully not too contended) spinlock and in most
places an interrupt disable/enable pair.

FWIW the race condition is also present on 64-bit platforms, resulting
in inaccurate statistic counters. I can understand if you consider it a
mild annoyance, not worth fixing.

> It seems to me that the same syncp can be used from two different
> threads : hard irq and napi poller...

Yes, that's exactly the scenario that locks up my system.

> At this point, I do not see why you keep linux/u64_stats_sync.h if you
> decide to go for a spinlock...

The spinlock does not havce to be taken on the reader side, so the
seqcounter still adds some value.

> Alternative would use atomic64_t fields for the ones where there is no
> mutual exclusion.
> 
> RX : napi poll is definitely safe (protected by an atomic bit)
> TX : each TX queue is also safe (protected by an atomic exclusion for
> non LLTX drivers)
> 
> This leaves the fields updated from hardware interrupt context ?

I'm afraid I don't have enough network-stack-foo to follow here.

My issue on 32 bit is that stmmac_xmit() may be called directly from
process context while another core runs the TX napi on the same channel
(in interrupt context). I didn't observe any race on the RX path, but I
believe it's possible with NAPI busy polling.

In any case, I don't see the connection with LLTX. Maybe you want to
say that the TX queue is safe for stmmac (because it is a non-LLTX
driver), but might not be safe for LLTX drivers?

Petr T