| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <e540b1c192632dfcf4c0367be133c9ca51f33b43.camel@mellanox.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2019 01:42:34 +0000
From: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
To: "jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com" <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] devlink: Execute devlink health recover as a
work
On Thu, 2019-04-25 at 14:38 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2019 13:57:03 +0300, Moshe Shemesh wrote:
> > Different reporters have different rules in the driver and are
> > being
> > created/destroyed during different stages of driver
> > load/unload/running.
> > So during execution of a reporter recover the flow can go through
> > another reporter's destroy and create. Such flow leads to deadlock
> > trying to lock a mutex already held if the flow was triggered by
> > devlink
> > recover command.
> > To avoid such deadlock, we execute the recover flow from a
> > workqueue.
> > Once the recover work is done successfully the reporter health
> > state and
> > recover counter are being updated.
>
> Naive question, why not just run the doit unlocked? Why the async?
>
> > Signed-off-by: Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...lanox.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
>
> One day we really gotta start documenting the context from which
> things are called and locks called when ops are invoked.. :)
>
> > diff --git a/net/core/devlink.c b/net/core/devlink.c
> > index 7b91605..8ee380e 100644
> > --- a/net/core/devlink.c
> > +++ b/net/core/devlink.c
> > @@ -4443,6 +4444,40 @@ struct devlink_health_reporter {
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
> > +static int
> > +devlink_health_reporter_recover(struct devlink_health_reporter
> > *reporter,
> > + void *priv_ctx)
> > +{
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + if (!reporter->ops->recover)
> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> > + err = reporter->ops->recover(reporter, priv_ctx);
> > + if (err)
> > + return err;
> > +
> > + reporter->recovery_count++;
> > + reporter->health_state = DEVLINK_HEALTH_REPORTER_STATE_HEALTHY;
> > + reporter->last_recovery_ts = jiffies;
>
> Well, the dump looks at these without taking any locks..
>
> > + trace_devlink_health_reporter_state_update(reporter->devlink,
> > + reporter->ops->name,
> > + reporter-
> > >health_state);
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void
> > +devlink_health_reporter_recover_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > +{
> > + struct devlink_health_reporter *reporter;
> > +
> > + reporter = container_of(work, struct devlink_health_reporter,
> > + recover_work);
> > +
> > + devlink_health_reporter_recover(reporter, NULL);
> > +}
> > +
> > /**
> > * devlink_health_reporter_create - create devlink health reporter
> > *
> > @@ -4483,6 +4518,8 @@ struct devlink_health_reporter *
> > reporter->devlink = devlink;
> > reporter->graceful_period = graceful_period;
> > reporter->auto_recover = auto_recover;
> > + INIT_WORK(&reporter->recover_work,
> > + devlink_health_reporter_recover_work);
> > mutex_init(&reporter->dump_lock);
> > list_add_tail(&reporter->list, &devlink->reporter_list);
> > unlock:
> > @@ -4505,6 +4542,7 @@ struct devlink_health_reporter *
> > mutex_unlock(&reporter->devlink->lock);
> > if (reporter->dump_fmsg)
> > devlink_fmsg_free(reporter->dump_fmsg);
> > + cancel_work_sync(&reporter->recover_work);
> > kfree(reporter);
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devlink_health_reporter_destroy);
> > @@ -4526,26 +4564,6 @@ struct devlink_health_reporter *
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devlink_health_reporter_state_update);
> >
> > -static int
> > -devlink_health_reporter_recover(struct devlink_health_reporter
> > *reporter,
> > - void *priv_ctx)
> > -{
> > - int err;
> > -
> > - if (!reporter->ops->recover)
> > - return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > -
> > - err = reporter->ops->recover(reporter, priv_ctx);
> > - if (err)
> > - return err;
> > -
> > - reporter->recovery_count++;
> > - reporter->health_state = DEVLINK_HEALTH_REPORTER_STATE_HEALTHY;
> > - reporter->last_recovery_ts = jiffies;
> > -
> > - return 0;
> > -}
> > -
> > static void
> > devlink_health_dump_clear(struct devlink_health_reporter
> > *reporter)
> > {
> > @@ -4813,7 +4831,11 @@ static int
> > devlink_nl_cmd_health_reporter_recover_doit(struct sk_buff *skb,
> > if (!reporter)
> > return -EINVAL;
> >
> > - return devlink_health_reporter_recover(reporter, NULL);
> > + if (!reporter->ops->recover)
> > + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> > +
> > + queue_work(devlink->reporters_wq, &reporter->recover_work);
> > + return 0;
> > }
>
> So the recover user space request will no longer return the status,
> and
> it will not actually wait for the recover to happen. Leaving user
> pondering - did the recover run and fail, or did it nor get run
> yet...
>
wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout is missing from the design ?
> > static int devlink_nl_cmd_health_reporter_diagnose_doit(struct
> > sk_buff *skb,
> > @@ -5234,6 +5256,11 @@ struct devlink *devlink_alloc(const struct
> > devlink_ops *ops, size_t priv_size)
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&devlink->param_list);
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&devlink->region_list);
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&devlink->reporter_list);
> > + devlink->reporters_wq =
> > create_singlethread_workqueue("devlink_reporters");
>
> Why is it single threaded?
>
> > + if (!devlink->reporters_wq) {
> > + kfree(devlink);
> > + return NULL;
> > + }
> > mutex_init(&devlink->lock);
> > return devlink;
> > }
> > @@ -5278,6 +5305,7 @@ void devlink_unregister(struct devlink
> > *devlink)
> > void devlink_free(struct devlink *devlink)
> > {
> > mutex_destroy(&devlink->lock);
> > + destroy_workqueue(devlink->reporters_wq);
> > WARN_ON(!list_empty(&devlink->reporter_list));
> > WARN_ON(!list_empty(&devlink->region_list));
> > WARN_ON(!list_empty(&devlink->param_list));
Powered by blists - more mailing lists