netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: make tcp

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]

Date:   Wed, 11 Mar 2020 13:41:06 -0700
From:   Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...com,
        daniel@...earbox.net, sdf@...gle.com, andrii.nakryiko@...il.com,
        kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: make tcp_rtt test more robust to
 failures

On 03/11, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> Switch to non-blocking accept and wait for server thread to exit before
> proceeding. I noticed that sometimes tcp_rtt server thread failure would
> "spill over" into other tests (that would run after tcp_rtt), probably just
> because server thread exits much later and tcp_rtt doesn't wait for it.
> 
> Fixes: 8a03222f508b ("selftests/bpf: test_progs: fix client/server race in tcp_rtt")
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
> ---
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_rtt.c        | 30 +++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_rtt.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_rtt.c
> index f4cd60d6fba2..d235eea0de27 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_rtt.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_rtt.c
> @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int start_server(void)
>  	};
>  	int fd;
>  
> -	fd = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
> +	fd = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM | SOCK_NONBLOCK, 0);
>  	if (fd < 0) {
>  		log_err("Failed to create server socket");
>  		return -1;
> @@ -205,6 +205,7 @@ static int start_server(void)
>  
>  static pthread_mutex_t server_started_mtx = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
>  static pthread_cond_t server_started = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
> +static volatile bool server_done = false;
>  
>  static void *server_thread(void *arg)
>  {
> @@ -222,23 +223,22 @@ static void *server_thread(void *arg)
>  
>  	if (CHECK_FAIL(err < 0)) {
>  		perror("Failed to listed on socket");
> -		return NULL;
> +		return ERR_PTR(err);
>  	}
>  
> -	client_fd = accept(fd, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, &len);
> +	while (!server_done) {
> +		client_fd = accept(fd, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, &len);
> +		if (client_fd == -1 && errno == EAGAIN)
> +			continue;
> +		break;
> +	}
>  	if (CHECK_FAIL(client_fd < 0)) {
>  		perror("Failed to accept client");
> -		return NULL;
> +		return ERR_PTR(err);
>  	}
>  
> -	/* Wait for the next connection (that never arrives)
> -	 * to keep this thread alive to prevent calling
> -	 * close() on client_fd.
> -	 */
> -	if (CHECK_FAIL(accept(fd, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, &len) >= 0)) {
> -		perror("Unexpected success in second accept");
> -		return NULL;
> -	}
> +	while (!server_done)
> +		usleep(50);
>  
>  	close(client_fd);
>  
> @@ -249,6 +249,7 @@ void test_tcp_rtt(void)
>  {
>  	int server_fd, cgroup_fd;
>  	pthread_t tid;
> +	void *server_res;
>  
>  	cgroup_fd = test__join_cgroup("/tcp_rtt");
>  	if (CHECK_FAIL(cgroup_fd < 0))
> @@ -267,6 +268,11 @@ void test_tcp_rtt(void)
>  	pthread_mutex_unlock(&server_started_mtx);
>  
>  	CHECK_FAIL(run_test(cgroup_fd, server_fd));
> +
> +	server_done = true;

[..]
> +	pthread_join(tid, &server_res);
> +	CHECK_FAIL(IS_ERR(server_res));

I wonder if we add (move) close(server_fd) before pthread_join(), can we
fix this issue without using non-blocking socket? The accept() should
return as soon as server_fd is closed so it's essentially your
'server_done'.

> +
>  close_server_fd:
>  	close(server_fd);
>  close_cgroup_fd:
> -- 
> 2.17.1
>