linux-kernel - Re: Problem in pfmemalloc skb handling in net/core/dev.c

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <87ab3d13-f95d-07c5-fc6a-fb33e32685e5@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Apr 2021 12:04:11 +0200
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Xie He <xie.he.0141@...il.com>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>
Cc:     Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, jslaby@...e.cz,
        Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>,
        Eric B Munson <emunson@...bm.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@...akpoint.cc>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Problem in pfmemalloc skb handling in net/core/dev.c



On 4/9/21 11:14 AM, Xie He wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 9, 2021 at 1:44 AM Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net> wrote:
>>
>> That would imply that the tap was communicating with a swap device to
>> allocate a pfmemalloc skb which shouldn't happen. Furthermore, it would
>> require the swap device to be deactivated while pfmemalloc skbs still
>> existed. Have you encountered this problem?
> 
> I'm not a user of swap devices or pfmemalloc skbs. I just want to make
> sure the protocols that I'm developing (not IP or IPv6) won't get
> pfmemalloc skbs when receiving, because those protocols cannot handle
> them.
> 
> According to the code, it seems always possible to get a pfmemalloc
> skb when a network driver calls "__netdev_alloc_skb". The skb will
> then be queued in per-CPU backlog queues when the driver calls
> "netif_rx". There seems to be nothing preventing "sk_memalloc_socks()"
> from becoming "false" after the skb is allocated and before it is
> handled by "__netif_receive_skb".
> 
> Do you mean that at the time "sk_memalloc_socks()" changes from "true"
> to "false", there would be no in-flight skbs currently being received,
> and all network communications have been paused?
> 


Note that pfmemalloc skbs are normally dropped in sk_filter_trim_cap()

Simply make sure your protocol use it.