netdev - Re: [RFC] net/hsr: Add support for IEC 62439-3 High-availability Seamless Redundancy

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: <4FB14ADD.3050708@xdin.com>
Date:	Mon, 14 May 2012 18:11:44 +0000
From:	Arvid Brodin <Arvid.Brodin@...n.com>
To:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Bruno Ferreira <balferreira@...glemail.com>,
	Arvid Brodin <Arvid.Brodin@...n.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [RFC] net/hsr: Add support for IEC 62439-3 High-availability
 Seamless Redundancy

On 2012-03-27 15:20, Arvid Brodin wrote:
> Hi!

*snip*
> 
> 2) I have a locking problem that I haven't managed to figure out. This happens
>    the first time I send any packet (hsr_dev_xmit() in hsr_device.c:121, called
>    from hsr_device.c:147). It happens even if I set skb2 to NULL (i.e. only send
>    one copy):
> 
> =============================================
> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
> 2.6.37 #118
> ---------------------------------------------
> swapper/0 is trying to acquire lock:
>  (_xmit_ETHER#2){+.-...}, at: [<901bf38e>] sch_direct_xmit+0x24/0x152
> 
> but task is already holding lock:
>  (_xmit_ETHER#2){+.-...}, at: [<901b4d1a>] dev_queue_xmit+0x31e/0x3cc
> 
> other info that might help us debug this:
> 4 locks held by swapper/0:
>  #0:  (&n->timer){+.-...}, at: [<9002bc20>] run_timer_softirq+0x98/0x184
>  #1:  (rcu_read_lock_bh){.+....}, at: [<901b49fc>] dev_queue_xmit+0x0/0x3cc
>  #2:  (_xmit_ETHER#2){+.-...}, at: [<901b4d1a>] dev_queue_xmit+0x31e/0x3cc
>  #3:  (rcu_read_lock_bh){.+....}, at: [<901b49fc>] dev_queue_xmit+0x0/0x3cc
> 
> stack backtrace:
> Call trace:
>  [<9001c640>] dump_stack+0x18/0x20
>  [<90040eac>] validate_chain+0x40c/0x9ac
>  [<90041a58>] __lock_acquire+0x60c/0x670
>  [<90042f32>] lock_acquire+0x3a/0x48
>  [<902201a4>] _raw_spin_lock+0x20/0x44
>  [<901bf38e>] sch_direct_xmit+0x24/0x152
>  [<901b4c14>] dev_queue_xmit+0x218/0x3cc
>  [<9021c2e0>] slave_xmit+0x10/0x14
>  [<9021c540>] hsr_dev_xmit+0x88/0x8c
>  [<901b4942>] dev_hard_start_xmit+0x3c6/0x480
>  [<901b4d34>] dev_queue_xmit+0x338/0x3cc
>  [<901e3cd8>] arp_xmit+0x8/0xc
>  [<901e4436>] arp_send+0x2a/0x2c
>  [<901e4e74>] arp_solicit+0x15c/0x170
>  [<901bad0c>] neigh_timer_handler+0x1c0/0x204
>  [<9002bc8a>] run_timer_softirq+0x102/0x184
>  [<900287d8>] __do_softirq+0x64/0xe0
>  [<9002896a>] do_softirq+0x26/0x48
>  [<90028a66>] irq_exit+0x2e/0x64
>  [<90019f16>] do_IRQ+0x46/0x5c
>  [<90018428>] irq_level0+0x18/0x60
>  [<9021cc16>] rest_init+0x72/0x98
>  [<9000063c>] start_kernel+0x21c/0x258
>  [<00000000>] 0x0
> 
>    Any idea why this happens? I need help!


I've spent a few days digging into this and the key apparently is NETIF_F_LLTX.

The problem seems to be that HARD_TX_LOCK is called more than once, first for my virtual
hsr device and then, recursively, for each of the slaves in turn. (At least that's where
lockdep complains - at __netif_tx_lock(), that is.)

At first I just could not understand why both the VLAN and the bonding code got away with
recursive calls to dev_queue_xmit() but I didn't. After some gooling (a lot, actually) I
found some references to the NETIF_F_LLTX flag (here's one:
http://lwn.net/Articles/121566/). I realised both VLAN and bonding code set this flag. And
sure enough, if I set it for my hsr device lockdep does not complain any more.

But NETIF_F_LLTX is described as deprecated in both netdevice.h and in
Documentation/networking/netdevices.txt. Is there an alternative solution that I should
use instead?

(To recap, a hsr device is a virtual device which uses two Ethernet devices as slaves.
This gives redundancy with instant failover, and since nodes are connected in a ring
topology, uses less cabling than duplication.)

-- 
Arvid Brodin | Consultant (Linux)
XDIN AB | Jan Stenbecks Torg 17 | SE-164 40 Kista | Sweden | xdin.com--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html