| 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: <20190907134548.32071-1-ap420073@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2019 22:45:48 +0900
From: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>
To: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, j.vosburgh@...il.com,
vfalico@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net, jiri@...nulli.us,
sd@...asysnail.net, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, saeedm@...lanox.com,
manishc@...vell.com, rahulv@...vell.com, kys@...rosoft.com,
haiyangz@...rosoft.com, sthemmin@...rosoft.com, sashal@...nel.org,
hare@...e.de, varun@...lsio.com, ubraun@...ux.ibm.com,
kgraul@...ux.ibm.com, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
Cc: ap420073@...il.com
Subject: [PATCH net v2 02/11] vlan: use dynamic lockdep key instead of subclass
All VLAN device has same lockdep key and subclass is initialized with
nest_level.
But actual nest_level value can be changed when a lower device is attached.
And at this moment, the subclass should be updated but it seems to be
unsafe.
So this patch makes VLAN use dynamic lockdep key instead of the subclass.
Test commands:
ip link add dummy0 type dummy
ip link set dummy0 up
ip link add bond0 type bond
ip link add vlan_dummy1 link dummy0 type vlan id 1
ip link add vlan_bond1 link bond0 type vlan id 2
ip link set vlan_dummy1 master bond0
ip link set bond0 up
ip link set vlan_dummy1 up
ip link set vlan_bond1 up
Both vlan_dummy1 and vlan_bond1 have the same subclass and it makes
unnecessary deadlock warning message.
Splat looks like:
[ 149.244978] ============================================
[ 149.244978] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
[ 149.244978] 5.3.0-rc7+ #322 Not tainted
[ 149.244978] --------------------------------------------
[ 149.244978] ip/1340 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 149.244978] 000000001399b1a7 (&vlan_netdev_addr_lock_key/1){+...}, at: dev_uc_sync_multiple+0xfa/0x1a0
[ 149.279600]
[ 149.279600] but task is already holding lock:
[ 149.279600] 00000000b963d9b4 (&vlan_netdev_addr_lock_key/1){+...}, at: dev_set_rx_mode+0x19/0x30
[ 149.279600]
[ 149.279600] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 149.305981] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 149.305981]
[ 149.305981] CPU0
[ 149.305981] ----
[ 149.305981] lock(&vlan_netdev_addr_lock_key/1);
[ 149.305981] lock(&vlan_netdev_addr_lock_key/1);
[ 149.326258]
[ 149.326258] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 149.326258]
[ 149.326258] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
[ 149.326258]
[ 149.326258] 4 locks held by ip/1340:
[ 149.326258] #0: 00000000927f0698 (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}, at: rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x466/0x8a0
[ 149.326258] #1: 00000000b963d9b4 (&vlan_netdev_addr_lock_key/1){+...}, at: dev_set_rx_mode+0x19/0x30
[ 149.326258] #2: 0000000027395445 (&dev_addr_list_lock_key/3){+...}, at: dev_mc_sync+0xfa/0x1a0
[ 149.369961] #3: 00000000ce334932 (rcu_read_lock){....}, at: bond_set_rx_mode+0x5/0x3c0 [bonding]
[ 149.369961]
[ 149.369961] stack backtrace:
[ 149.369961] CPU: 1 PID: 1340 Comm: ip Not tainted 5.3.0-rc7+ #322
[ 149.369961] Call Trace:
[ 149.369961] dump_stack+0x7c/0xbb
[ 149.369961] __lock_acquire+0x26a9/0x3de0
[ 149.369961] ? register_lock_class+0x14d0/0x14d0
[ 149.369961] ? register_lock_class+0x14d0/0x14d0
[ 149.369961] lock_acquire+0x164/0x3b0
[ 149.433970] ? dev_uc_sync_multiple+0xfa/0x1a0
[ 149.433970] _raw_spin_lock_nested+0x2e/0x60
[ 149.433970] ? dev_uc_sync_multiple+0xfa/0x1a0
[ 149.433970] dev_uc_sync_multiple+0xfa/0x1a0
[ 149.433970] bond_set_rx_mode+0x269/0x3c0 [bonding]
[ 149.433970] ? bond_init+0x6f0/0x6f0 [bonding]
[ 149.433970] dev_mc_sync+0x15a/0x1a0
[ 149.433970] vlan_dev_set_rx_mode+0x37/0x80 [8021q]
[ 149.433970] dev_set_rx_mode+0x21/0x30
[ 149.433970] __dev_open+0x202/0x310
[ 149.433970] ? dev_set_rx_mode+0x30/0x30
[ 149.433970] ? mark_held_locks+0xa5/0xe0
[ 149.433970] ? __local_bh_enable_ip+0xe9/0x1b0
[ 149.433970] __dev_change_flags+0x3c3/0x500
[ ... ]
Fixes: 0fe1e567d0b4 ("[VLAN]: nested VLAN: fix lockdep's recursive locking warning")
Signed-off-by: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>
---
v1 -> v2 : this patch isn't changed
include/linux/if_vlan.h | 3 +++
net/8021q/vlan_dev.c | 28 +++++++++++++++-------------
2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/if_vlan.h b/include/linux/if_vlan.h
index 244278d5c222..1aed9f613e90 100644
--- a/include/linux/if_vlan.h
+++ b/include/linux/if_vlan.h
@@ -183,6 +183,9 @@ struct vlan_dev_priv {
struct netpoll *netpoll;
#endif
unsigned int nest_level;
+
+ struct lock_class_key xmit_lock_key;
+ struct lock_class_key addr_lock_key;
};
static inline struct vlan_dev_priv *vlan_dev_priv(const struct net_device *dev)
diff --git a/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c b/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c
index 93eadf179123..12bc80650087 100644
--- a/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c
+++ b/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c
@@ -494,24 +494,24 @@ static void vlan_dev_set_rx_mode(struct net_device *vlan_dev)
* "super class" of normal network devices; split their locks off into a
* separate class since they always nest.
*/
-static struct lock_class_key vlan_netdev_xmit_lock_key;
-static struct lock_class_key vlan_netdev_addr_lock_key;
-
static void vlan_dev_set_lockdep_one(struct net_device *dev,
struct netdev_queue *txq,
- void *_subclass)
+ void *_unused)
{
- lockdep_set_class_and_subclass(&txq->_xmit_lock,
- &vlan_netdev_xmit_lock_key,
- *(int *)_subclass);
+ struct vlan_dev_priv *vlan = vlan_dev_priv(dev);
+
+ lockdep_set_class(&txq->_xmit_lock, &vlan->xmit_lock_key);
}
-static void vlan_dev_set_lockdep_class(struct net_device *dev, int subclass)
+static void vlan_dev_set_lockdep_class(struct net_device *dev)
{
- lockdep_set_class_and_subclass(&dev->addr_list_lock,
- &vlan_netdev_addr_lock_key,
- subclass);
- netdev_for_each_tx_queue(dev, vlan_dev_set_lockdep_one, &subclass);
+ struct vlan_dev_priv *vlan = vlan_dev_priv(dev);
+
+ lockdep_register_key(&vlan->addr_lock_key);
+ lockdep_set_class(&dev->addr_list_lock, &vlan->addr_lock_key);
+
+ lockdep_register_key(&vlan->xmit_lock_key);
+ netdev_for_each_tx_queue(dev, vlan_dev_set_lockdep_one, NULL);
}
static int vlan_dev_get_lock_subclass(struct net_device *dev)
@@ -609,7 +609,7 @@ static int vlan_dev_init(struct net_device *dev)
SET_NETDEV_DEVTYPE(dev, &vlan_type);
- vlan_dev_set_lockdep_class(dev, vlan_dev_get_lock_subclass(dev));
+ vlan_dev_set_lockdep_class(dev);
vlan->vlan_pcpu_stats = netdev_alloc_pcpu_stats(struct vlan_pcpu_stats);
if (!vlan->vlan_pcpu_stats)
@@ -630,6 +630,8 @@ static void vlan_dev_uninit(struct net_device *dev)
kfree(pm);
}
}
+ lockdep_unregister_key(&vlan->addr_lock_key);
+ lockdep_unregister_key(&vlan->xmit_lock_key);
}
static netdev_features_t vlan_dev_fix_features(struct net_device *dev,
--
2.17.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists