[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e63b546f-b993-4e42-8269-e4d9afa5b845@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 22:31:34 +0200
From: Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>
To: "D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>, kgraul@...ux.ibm.com,
jaka@...ux.ibm.com, wintera@...ux.ibm.com
Cc: kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/5] net/smc: fix dangling sock under state
SMC_APPFINCLOSEWAIT
On 11.10.23 09:33, D. Wythe wrote:
> From: "D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
>
> Considering scenario:
>
> smc_cdc_rx_handler_rwwi
> __smc_release
> sock_set_flag
> smc_close_active()
> sock_set_flag
>
> __set_bit(DEAD) __set_bit(DONE)
>
> Dues to __set_bit is not atomic, the DEAD or DONE might be lost.
> if the DEAD flag lost, the state SMC_CLOSED will be never be reached
> in smc_close_passive_work:
>
> if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_DEAD) &&
> smc_close_sent_any_close(conn)) {
> sk->sk_state = SMC_CLOSED;
> } else {
> /* just shutdown, but not yet closed locally */
> sk->sk_state = SMC_APPFINCLOSEWAIT;
> }
>
> Replace sock_set_flags or __set_bit to set_bit will fix this problem.
> Since set_bit is atomic.
>
I didn't really understand the scenario. What is
smc_cdc_rx_handler_rwwi()? What does it do? Don't it get the lock during
the runtime?
> Signed-off-by: D. Wythe <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> net/smc/af_smc.c | 4 ++--
> net/smc/smc.h | 5 +++++
> net/smc/smc_cdc.c | 2 +-
> net/smc/smc_close.c | 2 +-
> 4 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
> index bacdd97..5ad2a9f 100644
> --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
> +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
> @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ static int __smc_release(struct smc_sock *smc)
>
> if (!smc->use_fallback) {
> rc = smc_close_active(smc);
> - sock_set_flag(sk, SOCK_DEAD);
> + smc_sock_set_flag(sk, SOCK_DEAD);
> sk->sk_shutdown |= SHUTDOWN_MASK;
> } else {
> if (sk->sk_state != SMC_CLOSED) {
> @@ -1742,7 +1742,7 @@ static int smc_clcsock_accept(struct smc_sock *lsmc, struct smc_sock **new_smc)
> if (new_clcsock)
> sock_release(new_clcsock);
> new_sk->sk_state = SMC_CLOSED;
> - sock_set_flag(new_sk, SOCK_DEAD);
> + smc_sock_set_flag(new_sk, SOCK_DEAD);
> sock_put(new_sk); /* final */
> *new_smc = NULL;
> goto out;
> diff --git a/net/smc/smc.h b/net/smc/smc.h
> index 24745fd..e377980 100644
> --- a/net/smc/smc.h
> +++ b/net/smc/smc.h
> @@ -377,4 +377,9 @@ void smc_fill_gid_list(struct smc_link_group *lgr,
> int smc_nl_enable_hs_limitation(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info);
> int smc_nl_disable_hs_limitation(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info);
>
> +static inline void smc_sock_set_flag(struct sock *sk, enum sock_flags flag)
> +{
> + set_bit(flag, &sk->sk_flags);
> +}
> +
> #endif /* __SMC_H */
> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_cdc.c b/net/smc/smc_cdc.c
> index 89105e9..01bdb79 100644
> --- a/net/smc/smc_cdc.c
> +++ b/net/smc/smc_cdc.c
> @@ -385,7 +385,7 @@ static void smc_cdc_msg_recv_action(struct smc_sock *smc,
> smc->sk.sk_shutdown |= RCV_SHUTDOWN;
> if (smc->clcsock && smc->clcsock->sk)
> smc->clcsock->sk->sk_shutdown |= RCV_SHUTDOWN;
> - sock_set_flag(&smc->sk, SOCK_DONE);
> + smc_sock_set_flag(&smc->sk, SOCK_DONE);
> sock_hold(&smc->sk); /* sock_put in close_work */
> if (!queue_work(smc_close_wq, &conn->close_work))
> sock_put(&smc->sk);
> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_close.c b/net/smc/smc_close.c
> index dbdf03e..449ef45 100644
> --- a/net/smc/smc_close.c
> +++ b/net/smc/smc_close.c
> @@ -173,7 +173,7 @@ void smc_close_active_abort(struct smc_sock *smc)
> break;
> }
>
> - sock_set_flag(sk, SOCK_DEAD);
> + smc_sock_set_flag(sk, SOCK_DEAD);
> sk->sk_state_change(sk);
>
> if (release_clcsock) {
Powered by blists - more mailing lists