linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 2/3] virtio-net: ensure rx NAPI is enabled before enabling refill work

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: <20251223203908-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2025 20:45:29 -0500
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Bui Quang Minh <minhquangbui99@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
	Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] virtio-net: ensure rx NAPI is enabled before
 enabling refill work

On Tue, Dec 23, 2025 at 10:25:32PM +0700, Bui Quang Minh wrote:
> Calling napi_disable() on an already disabled napi can cause the
> deadlock. Because the delayed refill work will call napi_disable(), we
> must ensure that refill work is only enabled and scheduled after we have
> enabled the rx queue's NAPI.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Bui Quang Minh <minhquangbui99@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> index 63126e490bda..8016d2b378cf 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> @@ -3208,16 +3208,31 @@ static int virtnet_open(struct net_device *dev)
>  	int i, err;
>  
>  	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
> +		bool schedule_refill = false;



> +
> +		/* - We must call try_fill_recv before enabling napi of the same
> +		 * receive queue so that it doesn't race with the call in
> +		 * virtnet_receive.
> +		 * - We must enable and schedule delayed refill work only when
> +		 * we have enabled all the receive queue's napi. Otherwise, in
> +		 * refill_work, we have a deadlock when calling napi_disable on
> +		 * an already disabled napi.
> +		 */


I would do:

	bool refill = i < vi->curr_queue_pairs;

in fact this is almost the same as resume with
one small difference. pass a flag so we do not duplicate code?

>  		if (i < vi->curr_queue_pairs) {
> -			enable_delayed_refill(&vi->rq[i]);
>  			/* Make sure we have some buffers: if oom use wq. */
>  			if (!try_fill_recv(vi, &vi->rq[i], GFP_KERNEL))
> -				schedule_delayed_work(&vi->rq[i].refill, 0);
> +				schedule_refill = true;
>  		}
>  
>  		err = virtnet_enable_queue_pair(vi, i);
>  		if (err < 0)
>  			goto err_enable_qp;
> +
> +		if (i < vi->curr_queue_pairs) {
> +			enable_delayed_refill(&vi->rq[i]);
> +			if (schedule_refill)
> +				schedule_delayed_work(&vi->rq[i].refill, 0);


hmm. should not schedule be under the lock?

> +		}
>  	}
>  
>  	if (virtio_has_feature(vi->vdev, VIRTIO_NET_F_STATUS)) {
> @@ -3456,11 +3471,16 @@ static void __virtnet_rx_resume(struct virtnet_info *vi,
>  	bool running = netif_running(vi->dev);
>  	bool schedule_refill = false;
>  
> +	/* See the comment in virtnet_open for the ordering rule
> +	 * of try_fill_recv, receive queue napi_enable and delayed
> +	 * refill enable/schedule.
> +	 */

so maybe common code?

>  	if (refill && !try_fill_recv(vi, rq, GFP_KERNEL))
>  		schedule_refill = true;
>  	if (running)
>  		virtnet_napi_enable(rq);
>  
> +	enable_delayed_refill(rq);
>  	if (schedule_refill)
>  		schedule_delayed_work(&rq->refill, 0);

hmm. should not schedule be under the lock?

>  }
> @@ -3470,18 +3490,15 @@ static void virtnet_rx_resume_all(struct virtnet_info *vi)
>  	int i;
>  
>  	for (i = 0; i < vi->max_queue_pairs; i++) {
> -		if (i < vi->curr_queue_pairs) {
> -			enable_delayed_refill(&vi->rq[i]);
> +		if (i < vi->curr_queue_pairs)
>  			__virtnet_rx_resume(vi, &vi->rq[i], true);
> -		} else {
> +		else
>  			__virtnet_rx_resume(vi, &vi->rq[i], false);
> -		}
>  	}
>  }
>  
>  static void virtnet_rx_resume(struct virtnet_info *vi, struct receive_queue *rq)
>  {
> -	enable_delayed_refill(rq);
>  	__virtnet_rx_resume(vi, rq, true);
>  }

so I would add bool to virtnet_rx_resume and call it everywhere,
removing __virtnet_rx_resume. can be a patch on top.

>  
> -- 
> 2.43.0