[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c15a81e1-252f-936c-26f0-f21e8165c622@mellanox.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 09:30:36 +0000
From: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com>
To: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>
CC: "bjorn.topel@...el.com" <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
"ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>,
"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"jonathan.lemon@...il.com" <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] xsk: add missing memory barrier in xskq_has_addrs()
On 2019-11-29 11:51, Magnus Karlsson wrote:
> The rings in AF_XDP between user space and kernel space have the
> following semantics:
>
> producer consumer
>
> if (LOAD ->consumer) { LOAD ->producer
> (A) smp_rmb() (C)
> STORE $data LOAD $data
> smp_wmb() (B) smp_mb() (D)
> STORE ->producer STORE ->consumer
> }
>
> The consumer function xskq_has_addrs() below loads the producer
> pointer and updates the locally cached copy of it. However, it does
> not issue the smp_rmb() operation required by the lockless ring. This
> would have been ok had the function not updated the locally cached
> copy, as that could not have resulted in new data being read from the
> ring. But as it updates the local producer pointer, a subsequent peek
> operation, such as xskq_peek_addr(), might load data from the ring
> without issuing the required smp_rmb() memory barrier.
Thanks for paying attention to it, but I don't think it can really
happen. xskq_has_addrs only updates prod_tail, but xskq_peek_addr
doesn't use prod_tail, it reads from cons_tail to cons_head, and every
cons_head update has the necessary smp_rmb.
Actually, the same thing happens with xskq_nb_avail. In xskq_full_desc,
we don't have any barrier after xskq_nb_avail, and xskq_peek_desc can be
called after xskq_full_desc, but it's absolutely fine, because
xskq_nb_avail doesn't touch cons_head. The same happens with
xskq_has_addrs and xskq_peek_addr.
So, I don't think this change is required. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
> static inline bool xskq_has_addrs(struct xsk_queue *q, u32 cnt)
> {
> u32 entries = q->prod_tail - q->cons_tail;
>
> if (entries >= cnt)
> return true;
>
> /* Refresh the local pointer. */
> q->prod_tail = READ_ONCE(q->ring->producer);
> *** MISSING MEMORY BARRIER ***
> entries = q->prod_tail - q->cons_tail;
>
> return entries >= cnt;
> }
>
> Fix this by adding the missing memory barrier at the indicated point
> above.
>
> Fixes: d57d76428ae9 ("Add API to check for available entries in FQ")
> Signed-off-by: Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>
> ---
> net/xdp/xsk_queue.h | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h b/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
> index eddae46..b5492c3 100644
> --- a/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
> +++ b/net/xdp/xsk_queue.h
> @@ -127,6 +127,7 @@ static inline bool xskq_has_addrs(struct xsk_queue *q, u32 cnt)
>
> /* Refresh the local pointer. */
> q->prod_tail = READ_ONCE(q->ring->producer);
> + smp_rmb(); /* C, matches B */
> entries = q->prod_tail - q->cons_tail;
>
> return entries >= cnt;
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists