[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20171006133436.GY3521@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2017 06:34:36 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] RCU: introduce noref debug
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 02:57:45PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> The networking subsystem is currently using some kind of long-lived
> RCU-protected, references to avoid the overhead of full book-keeping.
>
> Such references - skb_dst() noref - are stored inside the skbs and can be
> moved across relevant slices of the network stack, with the users
> being in charge of properly clearing the relevant skb - or properly refcount
> the related dst references - before the skb escapes the RCU section.
>
> We currently don't have any deterministic debug infrastructure to check
> the dst noref usages - and the introduction of others noref artifact is
> currently under discussion.
>
> This series tries to tackle the above introducing an RCU debug infrastructure
> aimed at spotting incorrect noref pointer usage, in patch one. The
> infrastructure is small and must be explicitly enabled via a newly introduced
> build option.
>
> Patch two uses such infrastructure to track dst noref usage in the networking
> stack.
>
> Patch 3 and 4 are bugfixes for small buglet found running this infrastructure
> on basic scenarios.
This patchset does not look like it handles rcu_read_lock() nesting.
For example, given code like this:
void foo(void)
{
rcu_read_lock();
rcu_track_noref(&key2, &noref2, true);
do_something();
rcu_track_noref(&key2, &noref2, false);
rcu_read_unlock();
}
void bar(void)
{
rcu_read_lock();
rcu_track_noref(&key1, &noref1, true);
do_something_more();
foo();
do_something_else();
rcu_track_noref(&key1, &noref1, false);
rcu_read_unlock();
}
void grill(void)
{
foo();
}
It looks like foo()'s rcu_read_unlock() will complain about key1.
You could remove foo()'s rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock(), but
that will break the call from grill().
Or am I missing something subtle here? Given patch 3/4, I suspect not...
Thanx, Paul
> Paolo Abeni (4):
> rcu: introduce noref debug
> net: use RCU noref infrastructure to track dst noref
> ipv4: drop unneeded and misleading RCU lock in ip_route_input_noref()
> tcp: avoid noref dst leak on input path
>
> include/linux/rcupdate.h | 11 ++++++
> include/linux/skbuff.h | 1 +
> include/net/dst.h | 5 +++
> kernel/rcu/Kconfig.debug | 15 ++++++++
> kernel/rcu/Makefile | 1 +
> kernel/rcu/noref_debug.c | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> net/ipv4/route.c | 7 +---
> net/ipv4/tcp_input.c | 5 ++-
> 8 files changed, 127 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 kernel/rcu/noref_debug.c
>
> --
> 2.13.6
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists