[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cd35316065cfe8d706ca2730babe3e6519df6034.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jan 2023 13:10:24 -0800
From: Alexander H Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To: Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>,
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 Tue, 2023-01-24 at 18:22 +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote:
> On 24.01.23 15:11, 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?
> I don't see how the approch taken in my patch would blow up. From what I
> can tell, it should be fairly close to how refcount is handled in
> page_frag_alloc. The main improvement it adds is to prevent it from
> blowing up if pool-allocated fragments get shared across multiple skbs
> with corresponding get_page and page_pool_return_skb_page calls.
>
> - Felix
>
Do you have the patch available to review as an RFC? From what I am
seeing it looks like you are underrunning on the pp_frag_count itself.
I would suspect the issue to be something like starting with a bad
count in terms of the total number of references, or deducing the wrong
amount when you finally free the page assuming you are tracking your
frag count using a non-atomic value in the driver.
Thanks,
- Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists