linux-kernel - Re: [net-next v6 5/9] net: napi: Add napi

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: <Z0d6QlrRUig5eD_I@LQ3V64L9R2>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 12:00:02 -0800
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	mkarsten@...terloo.ca, skhawaja@...gle.com, sdf@...ichev.me,
	bjorn@...osinc.com, amritha.nambiar@...el.com,
	sridhar.samudrala@...el.com, willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com,
	edumazet@...gle.com, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
	Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
	"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, pcnet32@...ntier.com
Subject: Re: [net-next v6 5/9] net: napi: Add napi_config

On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 10:51:16AM -0800, Joe Damato wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 09:43:54AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 06:45:00PM +0000, Joe Damato wrote:
> > > Add a persistent NAPI config area for NAPI configuration to the core.
> > > Drivers opt-in to setting the persistent config for a NAPI by passing an
> > > index when calling netif_napi_add_config.
> > > 
> > > napi_config is allocated in alloc_netdev_mqs, freed in free_netdev
> > > (after the NAPIs are deleted).
> > > 
> > > Drivers which call netif_napi_add_config will have persistent per-NAPI
> > > settings: NAPI IDs, gro_flush_timeout, and defer_hard_irq settings.
> > > 
> > > Per-NAPI settings are saved in napi_disable and restored in napi_enable.
> > > 
> > > Co-developed-by: Martin Karsten <mkarsten@...terloo.ca>
> > > Signed-off-by: Martin Karsten <mkarsten@...terloo.ca>
> > > Signed-off-by: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> > 
> > This patch triggers a lock inversion message on pcnet Ethernet adapters.
> 
> Thanks for the report. I am not familiar with the pcnet driver, but
> took some time now to read the report below and the driver code.
> 
> I could definitely be reading the output incorrectly (if so please
> let me know), but it seems like the issue can be triggered in this
> case:

Sorry, my apologies, I both:
  - read the report incorrectly, and
  - proposed a bad patch that would result in a deadlock :)

After re-reading it and running this by Martin (who is CC'd), the
inversion is actually:

CPU 0:
pcnet32_open
   lock(lp->lock)
     napi_enable
       napi_hash_add <- before this executes, CPU 1 proceeds
         lock(napi_hash_lock)
CPU 1:
  pcnet32_close
    napi_disable
      napi_hash_del
        lock(napi_hash_lock)
         < INTERRUPT >
            pcnet32_interrupt
              lock(lp->lock)

This is now an inversion because:

CPU 0: holds lp->lock and is about to take napi_hash_lock
CPU 1: holds napi_hashlock and an IRQ firing on CPU 1 tries to take
       lp->lock (which CPU 0 already holds)

Neither side can proceed:
  - CPU 0 is stuck waiting for napi_hash_lock
  - CPU 1 is stuck waiting for lp->lock

I think the below explanation is still correct as to why the
identified commit causes the issue:

> It seems this was triggered because before the identified commit,
> napi_enable did not call napi_hash_add (and thus did not take the
> napi_hash_lock).

However, the previous patch I proposed for pcnet32 would also cause
a deadlock as the watchdog timer's function also needs lp->lock.

A corrected patch for pcnet32 can be found below.

Guenter: Sorry, would you mind testing the below instead of the
previous patch?

Don: Let me know what you think about the below?

Netdev maintainers, there is an alternate locking solution I can
propose as an RFC that might avoid this class of problem if this
sort of issue is more widespread than just pcnet32:
  - add the NAPI to the hash in netif_napi_add_weight (instead of napi_enable)
  - remove the NAPI from the hash in __netif_napi_del (instead of
    napi_disable)

If changing the locking order in core is the desired route, than the
patch below should be unnecessary, but:

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pcnet32.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pcnet32.c
index 72db9f9e7bee..2e0077e68883 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pcnet32.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/amd/pcnet32.c
@@ -2625,11 +2625,10 @@ static int pcnet32_close(struct net_device *dev)

        del_timer_sync(&lp->watchdog_timer);

+       spin_lock_irqsave(&lp->lock, flags);
        netif_stop_queue(dev);
        napi_disable(&lp->napi);

-       spin_lock_irqsave(&lp->lock, flags);
-
        dev->stats.rx_missed_errors = lp->a->read_csr(ioaddr, 112);

        netif_printk(lp, ifdown, KERN_DEBUG, dev,