[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1976fa04-5298-6028-0086-abd51161f2f7@nbd.name>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 17:59:21 +0100
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>
To: Alexander H Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: page_pool: fix refcounting issues with fragmented
allocation
On 24.01.23 16:57, Alexander H Duyck wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-01-24 at 16:11 +0200, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
>> Hi Felix,
>>
>> ++cc Alexander and Yunsheng.
>>
>> Thanks for the report
>>
>> On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 at 14:43, Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name> wrote:
>> >
>> > While testing fragmented page_pool allocation in the mt76 driver, I was able
>> > to reliably trigger page refcount underflow issues, which did not occur with
>> > full-page page_pool allocation.
>> > It appears to me, that handling refcounting in two separate counters
>> > (page->pp_frag_count and page refcount) is racy when page refcount gets
>> > incremented by code dealing with skb fragments directly, and
>> > page_pool_return_skb_page is called multiple times for the same fragment.
>> >
>> > Dropping page->pp_frag_count and relying entirely on the page refcount makes
>> > these underflow issues and crashes go away.
>> >
>>
>> This has been discussed here [1]. TL;DR changing this to page
>> refcount might blow up in other colorful ways. Can we look closer and
>> figure out why the underflow happens?
>>
>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/1625903002-31619-4-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com/
>>
>> Thanks
>> /Ilias
>>
>>
>
> The logic should be safe in terms of the page pool itself as it should
> be holding one reference to the page while the pp_frag_count is non-
> zero. That one reference is what keeps the two halfs in sync as the
> page shouldn't be able to be freed until we exhaust the pp_frag_count.
>
> To have an underflow there are two possible scenarios. One is that
> either put_page or free_page is being called somewhere that the
> page_pool freeing functions should be used. The other possibility is
> that a pp_frag_count reference was taken somewhere a page reference
> should have.
>
> Do we have a backtrace for the spots that are showing this underrun? If
> nothing else we may want to look at tracking down the spots that are
> freeing the page pool pages via put_page or free_page to determine what
> paths these pages are taking.
Here's an example of the kind of traces that I was seeing with v6.1:
https://nbd.name/p/61a6617e
On v5.15 I also occasionally got traces like this:
https://nbd.name/p/0b9e4f0d
From what I can tell, it also triggered the warning that shows up when
page->pp_frag_count underflows. Unfortunately these traces don't
directly point to the place where things go wrong.
I do wonder if the pp_frag_count is maybe racy when we have a mix of
get_page + page_pool_put_page calls.
In case you're wondering what I was doing to trigger the crash: I simply
create 4 wireless client mode interfaces on the same card and pushed TCP
traffic from an AP to all 4 simultaneously. I can trigger it pretty much
immediately after TCP traffic ramps up.
- Felix
Powered by blists - more mailing lists