netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Treat __napi_schedule_irqoff() as __napi_schedule() on PREEMPT

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:   Thu, 13 May 2021 00:28:02 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>,
        linux-rt-users <linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, sassmann@...hat.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, stable-rt@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Treat __napi_schedule_irqoff() as __napi_schedule() on PREEMPT_RT

On Wed, May 12 2021 at 23:43, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> __napi_schedule_irqoff() is an optimized version of __napi_schedule()
> which can be used where it is known that interrupts are disabled,
> e.g. in interrupt-handlers, spin_lock_irq() sections or hrtimer
> callbacks.
>
> On PREEMPT_RT enabled kernels this assumptions is not true. Force-
> threaded interrupt handlers and spinlocks are not disabling interrupts
> and the NAPI hrtimer callback is forced into softirq context which runs
> with interrupts enabled as well.
>
> Chasing all usage sites of __napi_schedule_irqoff() is a whack-a-mole
> game so make __napi_schedule_irqoff() invoke __napi_schedule() for
> PREEMPT_RT kernels.
>
> The callers of ____napi_schedule() in the networking core have been
> audited and are correct on PREEMPT_RT kernels as well.
>
> Reported-by: Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>

Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>

> ---
> Alternatively __napi_schedule_irqoff() could be #ifdef'ed out on RT and
> an inline provided which invokes __napi_schedule().
>
> This was not chosen as it creates #ifdeffery all over the place and with
> the proposed solution the code reflects the documentation consistently
> and in one obvious place.

Blame me for that decision.

No matter which variant we end up with, this needs to go into all stable
RT kernels ASAP.

Thanks,

        tglx