netdev - [PATCH v2] net: sched: add barrier to fix packet stuck problem for lockless qdisc

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]

Message-Id: <20220526070145.127019-1-gjfang@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Thu, 26 May 2022 15:01:45 +0800
From:   Guoju Fang <gjfang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     edumazet@...gle.com
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
        gjfang@...ux.alibaba.com, guoju.fgj@...baba-inc.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, linyunsheng@...wei.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, rgauguey@...rayinc.com, sjones@...rayinc.com,
        vladimir.oltean@....com, vray@...rayinc.com, will@...nel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] net: sched: add barrier to fix packet stuck problem for lockless qdisc

In qdisc_run_end(), the spin_unlock() only has store-release semantic,
which guarantees all earlier memory access are visible before it. But
the subsequent test_bit() may be reordered ahead of the spin_unlock(),
and may cause a packet stuck problem.

The concurrent operations can be described as below,
         CPU 0                      |          CPU 1
   qdisc_run_end()                  |     qdisc_run_begin()
          .                         |           .
 ----> /* may be reorderd here */   |           .
|         .                         |           .
|     spin_unlock()                 |         set_bit()
|         .                         |         smp_mb__after_atomic()
 ---- test_bit()                    |         spin_trylock()
          .                         |          .

Consider the following sequence of events:
    CPU 0 reorder test_bit() ahead and see MISSED = 0
    CPU 1 calls set_bit()
    CPU 1 calls spin_trylock() and return fail
    CPU 0 executes spin_unlock()

At the end of the sequence, CPU 0 calls spin_unlock() and does nothing
because it see MISSED = 0. The skb on CPU 1 has beed enqueued but no one
take it, until the next cpu pushing to the qdisc (if ever ...) will
notice and dequeue it.

So one explicit barrier is needed between spin_unlock() and
test_bit() to ensure the correct order.

Fixes: 89837eb4b246 ("net: sched: add barrier to ensure correct ordering
for lockless qdisc")
Signed-off-by: Guoju Fang <gjfang@...ux.alibaba.com>
---
 include/net/sch_generic.h | 3 +++
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/net/sch_generic.h b/include/net/sch_generic.h
index 9bab396c1f3b..8a8738642ca0 100644
--- a/include/net/sch_generic.h
+++ b/include/net/sch_generic.h
@@ -229,6 +229,9 @@ static inline void qdisc_run_end(struct Qdisc *qdisc)
 	if (qdisc->flags & TCQ_F_NOLOCK) {
 		spin_unlock(&qdisc->seqlock);
 
+		/* ensure ordering between spin_unlock() and test_bit() */
+		smp_mb();
+
 		if (unlikely(test_bit(__QDISC_STATE_MISSED,
 				      &qdisc->state)))
 			__netif_schedule(qdisc);
-- 
2.32.0.3.g01195cf9f