linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] SUNRPC: Allow one callback request to be received from two sk

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALrKORpNpvhYvt+N+zH9D-VyY2fmQfm+2CUngv3A+FC5tAv=Lw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 23 Jan 2014 10:23:40 +0800
From:	shaobingqing <shaobingqing@...tor.com.cn>
To:	Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>
Cc:	Dr Fields James Bruce <bfields@...hat.com>,
	"Miller David S." <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linuxnfs <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SUNRPC: Allow one callback request to be received from
 two sk_buff

2014/1/21 Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>:
>
> On Jan 21, 2014, at 3:08, shaobingqing <shaobingqing@...tor.com.cn> wrote:
>
>> 2014/1/21 Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com>:
>>> On Mon, 2014-01-20 at 14:59 +0800, shaobingqing wrote:
>>>> In current code, there only one struct rpc_rqst is prealloced. If one
>>>> callback request is received from two sk_buff, the xprt_alloc_bc_request
>>>> would be execute two times with the same transport->xid. The first time
>>>> xprt_alloc_bc_request will alloc one struct rpc_rqst and the TCP_RCV_COPY_DATA
>>>> bit of transport->tcp_flags will not be cleared. The second time
>>>> xprt_alloc_bc_request could not alloc struct rpc_rqst any more and NULL
>>>> pointer will be returned, then xprt_force_disconnect occur. I think one
>>>> callback request can be allowed to be received from two sk_buff.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: shaobingqing <shaobingqing@...tor.com.cn>
>>>> ---
>>>> net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c |   11 +++++++++--
>>>> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c b/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
>>>> index ee03d35..606950d 100644
>>>> --- a/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
>>>> +++ b/net/sunrpc/xprtsock.c
>>>> @@ -1271,8 +1271,13 @@ static inline int xs_tcp_read_callback(struct rpc_xprt *xprt,
>>>>      struct sock_xprt *transport =
>>>>                              container_of(xprt, struct sock_xprt, xprt);
>>>>      struct rpc_rqst *req;
>>>> +     static struct rpc_rqst *req_partial;
>>>> +
>>>> +     if (req_partial == NULL)
>>>> +             req = xprt_alloc_bc_request(xprt);
>>>> +     else if (req_partial->rq_xid == transport->tcp_xid)
>>>> +             req = req_partial;
>>>
>>> What happens here if req_partial->rq_xid != transport->tcp_xid? AFAICS,
>>> req will be undefined. Either way, you cannot use a static variable for
>>> storage here: that isn't re-entrant.
>>
>> Because metadata sever only have one slot for backchannel request,
>> req_partial->rq_xid == transport->tcp_xid always happens, if the callback
>> request just being splited in two sk_buffs. But req_partial->rq_xid !=
>> transport->tcp_xid may also happens in some special cases, such as
>> retransmission occurs?
>
> If the server retransmits, then it is broken. The NFSv4.1 protocol does not allow it to retransmit unless the connection breaks.

What I am saying above is bogus. As far as I can see, If one callback
request is splitted into two sk_buffs, the function
xs_tcp_read_callback will be called two times with the same rpc_xprt
and the same xid. If between the two calls there is
another call with the same rpc_xprt, but different xid, we consider it
is another callback request from the same server, in
the condition that there is no retransmission in our enviorenment. But
this might not happen because there is only one
callback slot in each server.

>
>> If one callback request is splited in two sk_buffs, xs_tcp_read_callback
>> will be execute two times. The req_partial should be a static variable,
>> because  the second execution of xs_tcp_read_callback should use
>> the rpc_rqst allocated for the first execution, which saves information
>> copies from the first sk_buff.
>
> No! This is a multi-threaded/process environment which can support multiple connection. It is a bug to use a static variable.

I think I have misunderstood the question. Here a static variable can
not be used. Perhaps, we should define a variable for each
rpc_client  (or rpc xprt).

>
> --
> Trond Myklebust
> Linux NFS client maintainer
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/