[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171023193703.GA19457@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2017 21:37:03 +0200
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: problem with rtnetlink 'reference' count
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 06:37:44PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
>
> > Is refcount_t only supposed to be used with dec_and_test patterns?
>
> Yes, for reference counting objects.
Hmm, I still feel its appropriate, but anyway:
> > > This rtnetlink_rcv_msg() is called from softirq-context, right? Also,
> > > all that stuff happens with rcu_read_lock() held.
> >
> > No, its called from process context.
>
> OK, so then why not do something like so?
> @@ -260,10 +259,18 @@ void rtnl_unregister_all(int protocol)
> RCU_INIT_POINTER(rtnl_msg_handlers[protocol], NULL);
> rtnl_unlock();
>
> + /*
> + * XXX explain what this is for...
> + */
> synchronize_net();
>
> - while (refcount_read(&rtnl_msg_handlers_ref[protocol]) > 1)
> - schedule();
> + /*
> + * This serializes against the rcu_read_lock() section in
> + * rtnetlink_rcv_msg() such that after this, all prior instances have
> + * completed and future instances must observe the NULL written above.
> + */
> + synchronize_rcu();
Yes, but that won't help with running dumpers, see below.
> @@ -4218,7 +4223,6 @@ static int rtnetlink_rcv_msg(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
> };
> err = netlink_dump_start(rtnl, skb, nlh, &c);
This will copy .dumper function address to nlh->cb for later invocation
when dump gets resumed (its called from netlink_recvmsg()),
so this can return to userspace and dump can be resumed on next recv().
Because the dumper function was stored in the socket, NULLing the
rtnl_msg_handlers[] only prevents new dumps from starting but not
already set-up dumps from resuming.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists