[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL+tcoAtEnK6VFf9CD0x4h_VoeHwGhs87_MgZqdmebCcvtZvGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 10:45:48 +0800
From: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
To: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>
Cc: John Hickey <jjh@...dalian.us>, Shujin Li <lishujin@...ishou.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jason Xing <xingwanli@...ishou.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net v3] ixgbe: Panic during XDP_TX with
> 64 CPUs
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 11:50 PM Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de> wrote:
>
> [Cc: Remove undeliverable <xingwanli@...ishou.com>]
Ah, It's my previous company email. Sorry to notice this email so late.
>
> Am 26.03.23 um 17:03 schrieb Paul Menzel:
> > Dear John,
> >
> >
> > Thank you for your patch.
> >
> > I’d recommend, to use a statement in the git commit message/summary by
> > adding a verb (in imperative mood). Maybe:
> >
> > Fix panic during XDP_TX with > 64 CPUs
> >
> > Am 08.03.23 um 23:07 schrieb John Hickey:
> >> In commit 'ixgbe: let the xdpdrv work with more than 64 cpus'
> >> (4fe815850bdc), support was added to allow XDP programs to run on systems
> >
> > I think it’s more common to write it like:
> >
> > In commit 4fe815850bdc (ixgbe: let the xdpdrv work with more than 64
> > cpus) …
> >
> > Even shorter
> >
> > Commit 4fe815850bdc (ixgbe: let the xdpdrv work with more than 64 cpus)
> > adds support to allow XDP programs …
> >
> >> with more than 64 CPUs by locking the XDP TX rings and indexing them
> >> using cpu % 64 (IXGBE_MAX_XDP_QS).
> >>
> >> Upon trying this out patch via the Intel 5.18.6 out of tree driver
> >
> > Upon trying this patch out via …
> >
> >> on a system with more than 64 cores, the kernel paniced with an
> >> array-index-out-of-bounds at the return in ixgbe_determine_xdp_ring in
> >> ixgbe.h, which means ixgbe_determine_xdp_q_idx was just returning the
> >> cpu instead of cpu % IXGBE_MAX_XDP_QS. An example splat:
> >
> > Please add, that you have UBSAN enabled, or does it happen without?
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> ==========================================================================
> >> UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in
> >> /var/lib/dkms/ixgbe/5.18.6+focal-1/build/src/ixgbe.h:1147:26
> >> index 65 is out of range for type 'ixgbe_ring *[64]'
> >>
> >> ==========================================================================
> >> BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000058
> >> #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode
> >> #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page
> >> PGD 0 P4D 0
> >> Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP NOPTI
> >> CPU: 65 PID: 408 Comm: ksoftirqd/65
> >> Tainted: G IOE 5.15.0-48-generic #54~20.04.1-Ubuntu
> >> Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R640/0W23H8, BIOS 2.5.4 01/13/2020
> >> RIP: 0010:ixgbe_xmit_xdp_ring+0x1b/0x1c0 [ixgbe]
> >> Code: 3b 52 d4 cf e9 42 f2 ff ff 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 0f 1f 44 00 00 55 b9
> >> 00 00 00 00 48 89 e5 41 57 41 56 41 55 41 54 53 48 83 ec 08 <44> 0f b7
> >> 47 58 0f b7 47 5a 0f b7 57 54 44 0f b7 76 08 66 41 39 c0
> >
> > If you do not it yet, `scripts/decode_stacktrace.sh` helps decoding
> > these traces.
> >
> >> RSP: 0018:ffffbc3fcd88fcb0 EFLAGS: 00010282
> >> RAX: ffff92a253260980 RBX: ffffbc3fe68b00a0 RCX: 0000000000000000
> >> RDX: ffff928b5f659000 RSI: ffff928b5f659000 RDI: 0000000000000000
> >> RBP: ffffbc3fcd88fce0 R08: ffff92b9dfc20580 R09: 0000000000000001
> >> R10: 3d3d3d3d3d3d3d3d R11: 3d3d3d3d3d3d3d3d R12: 0000000000000000
> >> R13: ffff928b2f0fa8c0 R14: ffff928b9be20050 R15: 000000000000003c
> >> FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff92b9dfc00000(0000)
> >> knlGS:0000000000000000
> >> CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> >> CR2: 0000000000000058 CR3: 000000011dd6a002 CR4: 00000000007706e0
> >> DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> >> DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
> >> PKRU: 55555554
> >> Call Trace:
> >> <TASK>
> >> ixgbe_poll+0x103e/0x1280 [ixgbe]
> >> ? sched_clock_cpu+0x12/0xe0
> >> __napi_poll+0x30/0x160
> >> net_rx_action+0x11c/0x270
> >> __do_softirq+0xda/0x2ee
> >> run_ksoftirqd+0x2f/0x50
> >> smpboot_thread_fn+0xb7/0x150
> >> ? sort_range+0x30/0x30
> >> kthread+0x127/0x150
> >> ? set_kthread_struct+0x50/0x50
> >> ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
> >> </TASK>
> >>
> >> I think this is how it happens:
> >>
> >> Upon loading the first XDP program on a system with more than 64 CPUs,
> >> ixgbe_xdp_locking_key is incremented in ixgbe_xdp_setup. However,
> >> immediately after this, the rings are reconfigured by ixgbe_setup_tc.
> >> ixgbe_setup_tc calls ixgbe_clear_interrupt_scheme which calls
> >> ixgbe_free_q_vectors which calls ixgbe_free_q_vector in a loop.
> >> ixgbe_free_q_vector decrements ixgbe_xdp_locking_key once per call if
> >> it is non-zero. Commenting out the decrement in ixgbe_free_q_vector
> >> stopped my system from panicing.
> >>
> >> I suspect to make the original patch work, I would need to load an XDP
> >> program and then replace it in order to get ixgbe_xdp_locking_key back
> >> above 0 since ixgbe_setup_tc is only called when transitioning between
> >> XDP and non-XDP ring configurations, while ixgbe_xdp_locking_key is
> >> incremented every time ixgbe_xdp_setup is called.
> >>
> >> Also, ixgbe_setup_tc can be called via ethtool --set-channels, so this
> >> becomes another path to decrement ixgbe_xdp_locking_key to 0 on systems
> >> with greater than 64 CPUs.
> >
> > … with more than 64 CPUs.
> >
> >> For this patch, I have changed static_branch_inc to static_branch_enable
> >> in ixgbe_setup_xdp. We weren't counting references. The
> >> ixgbe_xdp_locking_key only protects code in the XDP_TX path, which is
> >> not run when an XDP program is loaded. The other condition for setting
> >> it on is the number of CPUs, which I assume is static.
> >>
> >> Fixes: 4fe815850bdc ("ixgbe: let the xdpdrv work with more than 64 cpus")
> >> Signed-off-by: John Hickey <jjh@...dalian.us>
> >> ---
> >> v1 -> v2:
> >> Added Fixes and net tag. No code changes.
> >> v2 -> v3:
> >> Added splat. Slight clarification as to why ixgbe_xdp_locking_key
> >> is not turned off. Based on feedback from Maciej Fijalkowski.
> >> ---
> >> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_lib.c | 3 ---
> >> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c | 2 +-
> >> 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_lib.c
> >> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_lib.c
> >> index f8156fe4b1dc..0ee943db3dc9 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_lib.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_lib.c
> >> @@ -1035,9 +1035,6 @@ static void ixgbe_free_q_vector(struct
> >> ixgbe_adapter *adapter, int v_idx)
> >> adapter->q_vector[v_idx] = NULL;
> >> __netif_napi_del(&q_vector->napi);
> >> - if (static_key_enabled(&ixgbe_xdp_locking_key))
> >> - static_branch_dec(&ixgbe_xdp_locking_key);
> >> -
> >> /*
> >> * after a call to __netif_napi_del() napi may still be used and
> >> * ixgbe_get_stats64() might access the rings on this vector,
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> >> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> >> index ab8370c413f3..cd2fb72c67be 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c
> >> @@ -10283,7 +10283,7 @@ static int ixgbe_xdp_setup(struct net_device
> >> *dev, struct bpf_prog *prog)
> >> if (nr_cpu_ids > IXGBE_MAX_XDP_QS * 2)
> >> return -ENOMEM;
> >> else if (nr_cpu_ids > IXGBE_MAX_XDP_QS)
> >> - static_branch_inc(&ixgbe_xdp_locking_key);
> >> + static_branch_enable(&ixgbe_xdp_locking_key);
> >> old_prog = xchg(&adapter->xdp_prog, prog);
> >> need_reset = (!!prog != !!old_prog);
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists