linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] e1000e: Use rtnl_lock to prevent race conditions between net and pci/pm

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]

Message-ID: <CAKgT0Ud7SupVd3RQmTEJ8e0fixiptS-1wFg+8V4EqpHEuAC3wQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 5 Oct 2019 10:22:55 -0700
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To:     "David Z. Dai" <zdai@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>, zdai@...ibm.com,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] e1000e: Use rtnl_lock to prevent race conditions
 between net and pci/pm

On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 7:18 PM David Z. Dai <zdai@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2019-10-04 at 16:36 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
> >
> > This patch is meant to address possible race conditions that can exist
> > between network configuration and power management. A similar issue was
> > fixed for igb in commit 9474933caf21 ("igb: close/suspend race in
> > netif_device_detach").
> >
> > In addition it consolidates the code so that the PCI error handling code
> > will essentially perform the power management freeze on the device prior to
> > attempting a reset, and will thaw the device afterwards if that is what it
> > is planning to do. Otherwise when we call close on the interface it should
> > see it is detached and not attempt to call the logic to down the interface
> > and free the IRQs again.
> >
> > >From what I can tell the check that was adding the check for __E1000_DOWN
> > in e1000e_close was added when runtime power management was added. However
> > it should not be relevant for us as we perform a call to
> > pm_runtime_get_sync before we call e1000_down/free_irq so it should always
> > be back up before we call into this anyway.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
> > ---
> >
> > I'm putting this out as an RFC for now. I haven't had a chance to do much
> > testing yet, but I have verified no build issues, and the driver appears
> > to load, link, and pass traffic without problems.
> >
> > This should address issues seen with either double freeing or never freeing
> > IRQs that have been seen on this and similar drivers in the past.
> >
> > I'll submit this formally after testing it over the weekend assuming there
> > are no issues.
> >
> >  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c |   33 ++++++++++++++--------------
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> > index d7d56e42a6aa..182a2c8f12d8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c

<snip>

> >
> > -#ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP
> >  static int e1000e_pm_thaw(struct device *dev)
> >  {
> >       struct net_device *netdev = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> >       struct e1000_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(netdev);
> > +     int rc = 0;
> >
> >       e1000e_set_interrupt_capability(adapter);
> > -     if (netif_running(netdev)) {
> > -             u32 err = e1000_request_irq(adapter);
> >
> > -             if (err)
> > -                     return err;
> > +     rtnl_lock();
> > +     if (netif_running(netdev)) {
> > +             rc = e1000_request_irq(adapter);
> > +             if (rc)
> > +                     goto err_irq;
> >
> >               e1000e_up(adapter);
> >       }
> >
> >       netif_device_attach(netdev);
> > -
> > -     return 0;
> > +     rtnl_unlock();
> > +err_irq:
> > +     return rc;
> >  }
> >
> In e1000e_pm_thaw(), these 2 lines need to switch order to avoid
> deadlock.
> from:
> +       rtnl_unlock();
> +err_irq:
>
> to:
> +err_irq:
> +       rtnl_unlock();
>
> I will find hardware to test this patch next week. Will update the test
> result later.
>
> Thanks! - David

Thanks for spotting that. I will update my copy of the patch for when
I submit the final revision.

I'll probably wait to submit it for acceptance until you have had a
chance to verify that it resolves the issue you were seeing.

Thanks.

- Alex