[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250710102639.280932-3-luyun_611@163.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2025 18:26:38 +0800
From: Yun Lu <luyun_611@....com>
To: willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com,
davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com,
kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com,
horms@...nel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 2/3] af_packet: fix soft lockup issue caused by tpacket_snd()
From: Yun Lu <luyun@...inos.cn>
When MSG_DONTWAIT is not set, the tpacket_snd operation will wait for
pending_refcnt to decrement to zero before returning. The pending_refcnt
is decremented by 1 when the skb->destructor function is called,
indicating that the skb has been successfully sent and needs to be
destroyed.
If an error occurs during this process, the tpacket_snd() function will
exit and return error, but pending_refcnt may not yet have decremented to
zero. Assuming the next send operation is executed immediately, but there
are no available frames to be sent in tx_ring (i.e., packet_current_frame
returns NULL), and skb is also NULL, the function will not execute
wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout() to yield the CPU. Instead, it
will enter a do-while loop, waiting for pending_refcnt to be zero. Even
if the previous skb has completed transmission, the skb->destructor
function can only be invoked in the ksoftirqd thread (assuming NAPI
threading is enabled). When both the ksoftirqd thread and the tpacket_snd
operation happen to run on the same CPU, and the CPU trapped in the
do-while loop without yielding, the ksoftirqd thread will not get
scheduled to run. As a result, pending_refcnt will never be reduced to
zero, and the do-while loop cannot exit, eventually leading to a CPU soft
lockup issue.
In fact, skb is true for all but the first iterations of that loop, and
as long as pending_refcnt is not zero, even if incremented by a previous
call, wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout() should be executed to
yield the CPU, allowing the ksoftirqd thread to be scheduled. Therefore,
the execution condition of this function should be modified to check if
pending_refcnt is not zero, instead of check skb.
As a result, packet_read_pending() may be called twice in the loop. This
will be optimized in the following patch.
Fixes: 89ed5b519004 ("af_packet: Block execution of tasks waiting for transmit to complete in AF_PACKET")
Cc: stable@...nel.org
Suggested-by: LongJun Tang <tanglongjun@...inos.cn>
Signed-off-by: Yun Lu <luyun@...inos.cn>
---
Changes in v4:
- Split to the fix alone. Thanks: Willem de Bruijn.
- Link to v3: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250709095653.62469-3-luyun_611@163.com/
Changes in v3:
- Simplify the code and reuse ph to continue. Thanks: Eric Dumazet.
- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250708020642.27838-1-luyun_611@163.com/
Changes in v2:
- Add a Fixes tag.
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250707081629.10344-1-luyun_611@163.com/
---
---
net/packet/af_packet.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c
index 7089b8c2a655..581a96ec8e1a 100644
--- a/net/packet/af_packet.c
+++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c
@@ -2846,7 +2846,7 @@ static int tpacket_snd(struct packet_sock *po, struct msghdr *msg)
ph = packet_current_frame(po, &po->tx_ring,
TP_STATUS_SEND_REQUEST);
if (unlikely(ph == NULL)) {
- if (need_wait && skb) {
+ if (need_wait && packet_read_pending(&po->tx_ring)) {
timeo = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(&po->skb_completion, timeo);
if (timeo <= 0) {
err = !timeo ? -ETIMEDOUT : -ERESTARTSYS;
--
2.43.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists