netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] bonding: Use notifiers for slave link state detection

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: <56A715F7.6090309@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:45:11 +0800
From:	zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>
To:	Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc:	mkubecek@...e.cz, vfalico@...il.com, gospo@...ulusnetworks.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, boris.shteinbock@...driver.com,
	emil.s.tantilov@...el.com, zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] bonding: Use notifiers for slave link state detection

On 01/26/2016 02:26 PM, zhuyj wrote:
> On 01/26/2016 02:00 PM, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
>> zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/26/2016 08:43 AM, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
>>>> <zyjzyj2000@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> From: Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Bonding will utilize notifier callbacks to detect slave
>>>>> link state changes. It is intended to be used with miimon
>>>>> set to zero, and does not support the updelay or downdelay
>>>>> options to bonding.
>>>>>
>>>>> Because of link flap from the slave interface, if the notifier
>>>>> is NETDEV_UP while the actual link state is down, it is not
>>>>> necessary to continue.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
>>>>     I haven't signed off on this patch.
>>>>
>>>>     I've just started some testing, but as before immediately get an
>>>> RCU warning; it looks to be coming from bond_miimon_inspect_slave();
>>>>
>>>> [  316.473050] bond1: Enslaving eth1 as a backup interface with an 
>>>> up link
>>>> [  316.473059]
>>>> [  316.473806] ===============================
>>>> [  316.475630] [ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]
>>>> [  316.477519] 4.4.0+ #38 Not tainted
>>>> [  316.479094] -------------------------------
>>>> [  316.480765] drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c:2024 suspicious 
>>>> rcu_dereference_check() usage!
>>>>
>>>>     This is presumably because the "case NETDEV_DOWN" call to
>>>> bond_miimon_inspect_slave does not hold RCU.  It does hold RTNL, 
>>>> though,
>>>> which should be safe for this usage (RTNL mutexes changes to the 
>>>> active
>>>> slave).  The appended patch on top of the original makes the 
>>>> warning go
>>>> away.
>>>>
>>>>     I'm still testing the patch and have no comment about its
>>>> functionality as yet.
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c 
>>>> b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>>> index 9f67948..e3faee9 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>>> @@ -2014,14 +2014,14 @@ static int bond_slave_info_query(struct 
>>>> net_device *bond_dev, struct ifslave *in
>>>>      /*-------------------------------- Monitoring
>>>> -------------------------------*/
>>>>    -/* called with rcu_read_lock() */
>>>> +/* called with rcu_read_lock() or RTNL */
>>>>    static int bond_miimon_inspect_slave(struct bonding *bond, 
>>>> struct slave *slave,
>>>>                         unsigned long event)
>>>>    {
>>>>        int link_state;
>>>>        bool ignore_updelay;
>>>>    -    ignore_updelay = !rcu_dereference(bond->curr_active_slave);
>>>> +    ignore_updelay = !rcu_dereference_rtnl(bond->curr_active_slave);
>>> Thanks a lot.
>>> Because kernel v4.4 needs this kind of patch, I backport this patch 
>>> from
>>> net-next to kernel v4.4.
>>>
>>> If it is not appropriate, I will revert this patch.
>>     I don't understand what you mean here.
>>
>>     I've tested the patch (with my above modification), and while I
>> seem to be hitting an unrelated bug in the ARP monitor, I believe this
>> patch will misbehave when the ARP monitor is running.
>>
>>     For example, if arp_interval=1000 and miimon=0, the link state
>> notifier callback will change a slave to up should a notifier event take
>> place.  So, hypothetically, if a slave is "down" according to the ARP
>> monitor (but actually carrier up), and then experience a carrier down
>> then up transition, the slave would be set to "up" even though the ARP
>> monitor believes it to be down.
>>
>>     I'm not able to induce the speedy link flap events, so I'm not
>> sure about this portion of the patch:
>>
>> +    /* Because of link flap from the slave interface, it is possilbe 
>> that
>> +     * the notifiler is NETDEV_UP while the actual link state is 
>> down. If
>> +     * so, it is not necessary to contiune.
>> +     */
>> +    switch (event) {
>> +    case NETDEV_UP:
>> +        if (!link_state)
>> +            return 0;
>> +        break;
>> +
>> +    case NETDEV_DOWN:
>> +        if (link_state)
>> +            return 0;
>> +        break;
>> +    }
>> +
>>
>>     Unless I misunderstood, Emil's comments elsewhere suggest that
>> the current ixgbe driver won't cause those, though.
> This patch will avoid useless configuration because of link flap.
Hi, Jay

Sorry. My bad. If there is no link flap in the current ixgbe driver, this
patch is not necessary.;-)

Best Regards!
Zhu Yanjun

>
> Hi, Emil
>
> Does the current ixgbe driver not cause link flap?
>
> Thanks a lot.
> Zhu Yanjun
>
>>
>>     -J
>>
>> ---
>>     -Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
>>
>