Message-ID: <dc6ff540-e7fc-695e-ed71-2bc0a92a0a9b@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 19 Oct 2019 11:15:28 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fix sk_page_frag() recursion from memory reclaim



On 10/19/19 10:01 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> From f0335a5d14d3596d36e3ffddb2fd4fa0dc6ca9c2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2019 09:10:57 -0700
> 
> sk_page_frag() optimizes skb_frag allocations by using per-task
> skb_frag cache when it knows it's the only user.  The condition is
> determined by seeing whether the socket allocation mask allows
> blocking - if the allocation may block, it obviously owns the task's
> context and ergo exclusively owns current->task_frag.
> 
> Unfortunately, this misses recursion through memory reclaim path.
> Please take a look at the following backtrace.
> 
>  [2] RIP: 0010:tcp_sendmsg_locked+0xccf/0xe10
>      ...
>      tcp_sendmsg+0x27/0x40
>      sock_sendmsg+0x30/0x40
>      sock_xmit.isra.24+0xa1/0x170 [nbd]
>      nbd_send_cmd+0x1d2/0x690 [nbd]
>      nbd_queue_rq+0x1b5/0x3b0 [nbd]
>      __blk_mq_try_issue_directly+0x108/0x1b0
>      blk_mq_request_issue_directly+0xbd/0xe0
>      blk_mq_try_issue_list_directly+0x41/0xb0
>      blk_mq_sched_insert_requests+0xa2/0xe0
>      blk_mq_flush_plug_list+0x205/0x2a0
>      blk_flush_plug_list+0xc3/0xf0
>  [1] blk_finish_plug+0x21/0x2e
>      _xfs_buf_ioapply+0x313/0x460
>      __xfs_buf_submit+0x67/0x220
>      xfs_buf_read_map+0x113/0x1a0
>      xfs_trans_read_buf_map+0xbf/0x330
>      xfs_btree_read_buf_block.constprop.42+0x95/0xd0
>      xfs_btree_lookup_get_block+0x95/0x170
>      xfs_btree_lookup+0xcc/0x470
>      xfs_bmap_del_extent_real+0x254/0x9a0
>      __xfs_bunmapi+0x45c/0xab0
>      xfs_bunmapi+0x15/0x30
>      xfs_itruncate_extents_flags+0xca/0x250
>      xfs_free_eofblocks+0x181/0x1e0
>      xfs_fs_destroy_inode+0xa8/0x1b0
>      destroy_inode+0x38/0x70
>      dispose_list+0x35/0x50
>      prune_icache_sb+0x52/0x70
>      super_cache_scan+0x120/0x1a0
>      do_shrink_slab+0x120/0x290
>      shrink_slab+0x216/0x2b0
>      shrink_node+0x1b6/0x4a0
>      do_try_to_free_pages+0xc6/0x370
>      try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pages+0xe3/0x1e0
>      try_charge+0x29e/0x790
>      mem_cgroup_charge_skmem+0x6a/0x100
>      __sk_mem_raise_allocated+0x18e/0x390
>      __sk_mem_schedule+0x2a/0x40
>  [0] tcp_sendmsg_locked+0x8eb/0xe10
>      tcp_sendmsg+0x27/0x40
>      sock_sendmsg+0x30/0x40
>      ___sys_sendmsg+0x26d/0x2b0
>      __sys_sendmsg+0x57/0xa0
>      do_syscall_64+0x42/0x100
>      entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9
> 
> In [0], tcp_send_msg_locked() was using current->page_frag when it
> called sk_wmem_schedule().  It already calculated how many bytes can
> be fit into current->page_frag.  Due to memory pressure,
> sk_wmem_schedule() called into memory reclaim path which called into
> xfs and then IO issue path.  Because the filesystem in question is
> backed by nbd, the control goes back into the tcp layer - back into
> tcp_sendmsg_locked().
> 
> nbd sets sk_allocation to (GFP_NOIO | __GFP_MEMALLOC) which makes
> sense - it's in the process of freeing memory and wants to be able to,
> e.g., drop clean pages to make forward progress.  However, this
> confused sk_page_frag() called from [2].  Because it only tests
> whether the allocation allows blocking which it does, it now thinks
> current->page_frag can be used again although it already was being
> used in [0].
> 
> After [2] used current->page_frag, the offset would be increased by
> the used amount.  When the control returns to [0],
> current->page_frag's offset is increased and the previously calculated
> number of bytes now may overrun the end of allocated memory leading to
> silent memory corruptions.
> 
> Fix it by updating sk_page_frag() to test __GFP_MEMALLOC and not use
> current->task_frag if set.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
> Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> ---
>  include/net/sock.h | 15 ++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
> index 2c53f1a1d905..4e2ca38acc3c 100644
> --- a/include/net/sock.h
> +++ b/include/net/sock.h
> @@ -2233,12 +2233,21 @@ struct sk_buff *sk_stream_alloc_skb(struct sock *sk, int size, gfp_t gfp,
>   * sk_page_frag - return an appropriate page_frag
>   * @sk: socket
>   *
> - * If socket allocation mode allows current thread to sleep, it means its
> - * safe to use the per task page_frag instead of the per socket one.
> + * Use the per task page_frag instead of the per socket one for
> + * optimization when we know there can be no other users.
> + *
> + * 1. The socket allocation mode allows current thread to sleep.  This is
> + *    the sleepable context which owns the task page_frag.
> + *
> + * 2. The socket allocation mode doesn't indicate that the socket is being
> + *    used to reclaim memory.  Memory reclaim may nest inside other socket
> + *    operations and end up recursing into sk_page_frag() while it's
> + *    already in use.
>   */
>  static inline struct page_frag *sk_page_frag(struct sock *sk)
>  {
> -	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(sk->sk_allocation))
> +	if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(sk->sk_allocation) &&
> +	    !(sk->sk_allocation & __GFP_MEMALLOC))
>  		return &current->task_frag;
>  
>  	return &sk->sk_frag;
> 

It seems compiler generates better code with :

diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
index ab905c4b1f0efd42ebdcae333b3f0a2c7c1b2248..56de6ac99f0952bd0bc003353c094ce3a5a852f4 100644
--- a/include/net/sock.h
+++ b/include/net/sock.h
@@ -2238,7 +2238,8 @@ struct sk_buff *sk_stream_alloc_skb(struct sock *sk, int size, gfp_t gfp,
  */
 static inline struct page_frag *sk_page_frag(struct sock *sk)
 {
-       if (gfpflags_allow_blocking(sk->sk_allocation))
+       if (likely((sk->sk_allocation & (__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | __GFP_MEMALLOC)) ==
+                   __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM))
                return &current->task_frag;
 
        return &sk->sk_frag;


WDYT ?

Thanks !

Powered by blists - more mailing lists