netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next V2] net/xdp: Fix suspicious RCU usage warning

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: <0ba57c5c-d241-208f-5d23-86b6d867e99c@mellanox.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Aug 2018 12:24:09 +0300
From:   Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
To:     Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Eran Ben Elisha <eranbe@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next V2] net/xdp: Fix suspicious RCU usage warning



On 13/08/2018 12:13 PM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:04:39 +0300
> Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com> wrote:
> 
>> Fix the warning below by calling rhashtable_lookup_fast.
>> Also, make some code movements for better quality and human
>> readability.
>>
>> [  342.450870] WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
>> [  342.455856] 4.18.0-rc2+ #17 Tainted: G           O
>> [  342.462210] -----------------------------
>> [  342.467202] ./include/linux/rhashtable.h:481 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
>> [  342.476568]
>> [  342.476568] other info that might help us debug this:
>> [  342.476568]
>> [  342.486978]
>> [  342.486978] rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
>> [  342.495211] 4 locks held by modprobe/3934:
>> [  342.500265]  #0: 00000000e23116b2 (mlx5_intf_mutex){+.+.}, at:
>> mlx5_unregister_interface+0x18/0x90 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.511953]  #1: 00000000ca16db96 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}, at: unregister_netdev+0xe/0x20
>> [  342.521109]  #2: 00000000a46e2c4b (&priv->state_lock){+.+.}, at: mlx5e_close+0x29/0x60
>> [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.531642]  #3: 0000000060c5bde3 (mem_id_lock){+.+.}, at: xdp_rxq_info_unreg+0x93/0x6b0
>> [  342.541206]
>> [  342.541206] stack backtrace:
>> [  342.547075] CPU: 12 PID: 3934 Comm: modprobe Tainted: G           O      4.18.0-rc2+ #17
>> [  342.556621] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R730/0H21J3, BIOS 1.5.4 10/002/2015
>> [  342.565606] Call Trace:
>> [  342.568861]  dump_stack+0x78/0xb3
>> [  342.573086]  xdp_rxq_info_unreg+0x3f5/0x6b0
>> [  342.578285]  ? __call_rcu+0x220/0x300
>> [  342.582911]  mlx5e_free_rq+0x38/0xc0 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.588602]  mlx5e_close_channel+0x20/0x120 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.594976]  mlx5e_close_channels+0x26/0x40 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.601345]  mlx5e_close_locked+0x44/0x50 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.607519]  mlx5e_close+0x42/0x60 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.613005]  __dev_close_many+0xb1/0x120
>> [  342.617911]  dev_close_many+0xa2/0x170
>> [  342.622622]  rollback_registered_many+0x148/0x460
>> [  342.628401]  ? __lock_acquire+0x48d/0x11b0
>> [  342.633498]  ? unregister_netdev+0xe/0x20
>> [  342.638495]  rollback_registered+0x56/0x90
>> [  342.643588]  unregister_netdevice_queue+0x7e/0x100
>> [  342.649461]  unregister_netdev+0x18/0x20
>> [  342.654362]  mlx5e_remove+0x2a/0x50 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.659944]  mlx5_remove_device+0xe5/0x110 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.666208]  mlx5_unregister_interface+0x39/0x90 [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.673038]  cleanup+0x5/0xbfc [mlx5_core]
>> [  342.678094]  __x64_sys_delete_module+0x16b/0x240
>> [  342.683725]  ? do_syscall_64+0x1c/0x210
>> [  342.688476]  do_syscall_64+0x5a/0x210
>> [  342.693025]  entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>>
>> Fixes: 8d5d88527587 ("xdp: rhashtable with allocator ID to pointer mapping")
>> Signed-off-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
>> Suggested-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
>> Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
>> ---
>>   net/core/xdp.c | 13 +++----------
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> V1 -> V2:
>> * Use rhashtable_lookup_fast and make some code movements, per Daniel's
>>    and Alexei's comments.
>>
>> Please queue to -stable v4.18.
>>
>> diff --git a/net/core/xdp.c b/net/core/xdp.c
>> index 3dd99e1c04f5..8b1c7b699982 100644
>> --- a/net/core/xdp.c
>> +++ b/net/core/xdp.c
>> @@ -105,16 +105,9 @@ static void __xdp_rxq_info_unreg_mem_model(struct xdp_rxq_info *xdp_rxq)
>>   
>>   	mutex_lock(&mem_id_lock);
>>   
>> -	xa = rhashtable_lookup(mem_id_ht, &id, mem_id_rht_params);
>> -	if (!xa) {
>> -		mutex_unlock(&mem_id_lock);
>> -		return;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -	err = rhashtable_remove_fast(mem_id_ht, &xa->node, mem_id_rht_params);
>> -	WARN_ON(err);
>> -
>> -	call_rcu(&xa->rcu, __xdp_mem_allocator_rcu_free);
>> +	xa = rhashtable_lookup_fast(mem_id_ht, &id, mem_id_rht_params);
>> +	if (xa && rhashtable_remove_fast(mem_id_ht, &xa->node, mem_id_rht_params))
>> +		call_rcu(&xa->rcu, __xdp_mem_allocator_rcu_free);
>>   
>>   	mutex_unlock(&mem_id_lock);
>>   }
> 
> This is wrong.
> 
> The function rhashtable_remove_fast() returns zero on success.
> Please, fix and send a V3.
> 
> Look at example in [1] section "Object removal"
> [1] https://lwn.net/Articles/751374/
> 

Right, thanks Jesper!
V3 Sent.