[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tencent_4CE06FA903D8DCB54F951A30@qq.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:07:14 +0800
From: "Xianpeng Zhao" <673321875@...com>
To: "Steffen Klassert"
<steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc: "netdev" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"alan" <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: Fw:[Bug 70471] xfrm policy node will double unlink.
Hi Steffen,
This problem is happened when running stress test; Very little chance can get this case.
As you say, add a long time sleep in function xfrm_policy_bysel_ctx between __xfrm_policy_unlink and
xfrm_policy_kill, will reproduce this issue manually.
About my patch, I am not sure it is OK, because after it patched, the issue had reproduced once, but after some days test recently, have not reproduced again.
But I can make sure when __xfrm_policy_unlink find the node had been removed, return NULL instead of delete again will fix this problem.
What's your suggestions?
------------------
Best Regards
Xianpeng
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Steffen Klassert";<steffen.klassert@...unet.com>;
Date: Tue, Feb 18, 2014 04:37 PM
To: "Xianpeng Zhao"<673321875@...com>;
Cc: "netdev"<netdev@...r.kernel.org>; "alan"<alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>;
Subject: Re: Fw:[Bug 70471] xfrm policy node will double unlink.
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:55:57AM +0800, Xianpeng Zhao wrote:
> Hi Group,
> I found a problem about xfrm policy.
>
> In corner case, xfrm policy node will be double unlinked from the list.
>
> The scenario like this:
> In thread context, After removed the node from list, before remove the xfrm policy expire timer. At this point, a timer interrupt come, and call the run_timer_softirq to execute the xfrm_policy_timer to remove the expired policy node; because this policy node had already removed from list. this remove will cause the node double unlinked.
Good catch!
I wonder why I've never seen this. Do you have a reproducer for this bug?
Looks like it is sufficient to reinitialize the bydst hlist in
__xfrm_policy_unlink(). Then hlist_unhashed() will notice that
this policy is not linked.
Does the patch below help?
diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
index 121399d..225f439 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
@@ -1156,7 +1156,7 @@ static struct xfrm_policy *__xfrm_policy_unlink(struct xfrm_policy *pol,
if (hlist_unhashed(&pol->bydst))
return NULL;
- hlist_del(&pol->bydst);
+ hlist_del_init(&pol->bydst);
hlist_del(&pol->byidx);
list_del(&pol->walk.all);
net->xfrm.policy_count[dir]--;
.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists