[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20151222.165020.297576414018581950.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 16:50:20 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: davej@...emonkey.org.uk
Cc: kraigatgoog@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Subject: Re: suspicious RCU usage (netlink/rhashtable)
From: Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 16:47:34 -0500
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 04:42:25PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Craig Gallek <kraigatgoog@...il.com>
> > Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 16:38:32 -0500
> >
> > > On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 4:28 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> > >> From: Craig Gallek <kraigatgoog@...il.com>
> > >> Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2015 15:51:19 -0500
> > >>
> > >>> I was actually just looking at this as well (though a slightly
> > >>> different stack). The issue is with: c6ff5268293e rhashtable: Fix
> > >>> walker list corruption
> > >>>
> > >>> It changed the lock acquired in rhashtable_walk_init to use the new
> > >>> spinlock, but the rht_dereference macro expects the mutex. I was
> > >>> still trying to track down which repository this change came in
> > >>> through, though...
> > >>
> > >> Both cam via my networking tree.
> > > Simple fix is below. Though, I don't understand the history of the
> > > multiple locks in this structure to be sure it's correct. I'll send
> > > it as a formal patch. Please reject if it's not the right approach.
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/rhashtable.c b/lib/rhashtable.c
> > > index 1c149e9..cc80870 100644
> > > --- a/lib/rhashtable.c
> > > +++ b/lib/rhashtable.c
> > > @@ -516,7 +516,8 @@ int rhashtable_walk_init(struct rhashtable *ht,
> > > struct rhashtable_iter *iter)
> > > return -ENOMEM;
> > >
> > > spin_lock(&ht->lock);
> > > - iter->walker->tbl = rht_dereference(ht->tbl, ht);
> > > + iter->walker->tbl =
> > > + rcu_dereference_protected(ht->tbl, lockdep_is_held(&ht->lock));
> > > list_add(&iter->walker->list, &iter->walker->tbl->walkers);
> > > spin_unlock(&ht->lock);
> >
> > How can this be the "fix"? That's exactly what's in the tree.
>
> I should have made clear, this is Linus' tree I'm hitting this on,
> which matches what Craig posted.
Ok, so this should be fixed in my 'net' tree and I'll send that to Linus
soon.
Thanks.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists