netdev - RE: [RFC PATCH] net/tipc: reduce tipc_node lock holding time in tipc

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: <20231124073134.2043605-1-xu.xin16@zte.com.cn>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 07:31:34 +0000
From: xu <xu.xin.sc@...il.com>
To: tung.q.nguyen@...tech.com.au
Cc: davem@...emloft.net,
	jmaloy@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	xu.xin.sc@...il.com,
	xu.xin16@....com.cn,
	yang.yang29@....com.cn,
	ying.xue@...driver.com,
	zhang.yunkai@....com.cn
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] net/tipc: reduce tipc_node lock holding time in tipc_rcv

>>Happy to see your reply. But Why? 'delete' is false from tipc_node_timeout(). Refer to:
>>https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.7-rc2/source/net/tipc/node.c#L844
>I should have explained it clearly:
>1/ link status must be protected.
>tipc_node_timeout()
>   tipc_node_link_down()
>   {
>      struct tipc_link *l = le->link;
>   
>      ...
>     __tipc_node_link_down(); <-- link status is referred. 
>      ...
>     if (delete) {
>        kfree(l);
>        le->link = NULL;
>     }
>     ...
>   }
>
>__tipc_node_link_down()
>{
>    ...
>   if (!l || tipc_link_is_reset(l)) <-- read link status
>    ...
>    tipc_link_reset(l); <--- this function will reset all things related to link.
>}
>
>2/ le->link must be protected.
>bearer_disable()
>{
>   ...
>   tipc_node_delete_links(net, bearer_id); <--- this will delete all links.
>   ...
>}
>
>tipc_node_delete_links()
>{
>   ...
>  tipc_node_link_down(n, bearer_id, true);
>   ...
>}

Could we please solve the problem mentioned above by adding spinlock(&le->lock)?

For example:

(BTW, I have tested it, with this change, enabling RPS based on tipc port can improve 25% of general throughput)

diff --git a/net/tipc/node.c b/net/tipc/node.c
index 3105abe97bb9..470c272d798e 100644
--- a/net/tipc/node.c
+++ b/net/tipc/node.c
@@ -1079,12 +1079,16 @@ static void tipc_node_link_down(struct tipc_node *n, int bearer_id, bool delete)
                __tipc_node_link_down(n, &bearer_id, &xmitq, &maddr);
        } else {
                /* Defuse pending tipc_node_link_up() */
+               spin_lock_bh(&le->lock);
                tipc_link_reset(l);
+               spin_unlock_bh(&le->lock);
                tipc_link_fsm_evt(l, LINK_RESET_EVT);
        }
        if (delete) {
+               spin_lock_bh(&le->lock);
                kfree(l);
                le->link = NULL;
+               spin_unlock_bh(&le->lock);
                n->link_cnt--;
        }
        trace_tipc_node_link_down(n, true, "node link down or deleted!");
@@ -2154,14 +2158,15 @@ void tipc_rcv(struct net *net, struct sk_buff *skb, struct tipc_bearer *b)
        /* Receive packet directly if conditions permit */
        tipc_node_read_lock(n);
        if (likely((n->state == SELF_UP_PEER_UP) && (usr != TUNNEL_PROTOCOL))) {
+               tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
                spin_lock_bh(&le->lock);
                if (le->link) {
                        rc = tipc_link_rcv(le->link, skb, &xmitq);
                        skb = NULL;
                }
                spin_unlock_bh(&le->lock);
-       }
-       tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
+       } else
+               tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
 
        /* Check/update node state before receiving */
        if (unlikely(skb)) {
@@ -2169,12 +2174,13 @@ void tipc_rcv(struct net *net, struct sk_buff *skb, struct tipc_bearer *b)
                        goto out_node_put;
                tipc_node_write_lock(n);
                if (tipc_node_check_state(n, skb, bearer_id, &xmitq)) {
+                       tipc_node_write_unlock(n);
                        if (le->link) {
                                rc = tipc_link_rcv(le->link, skb, &xmitq);
                                skb = NULL;
                        }
-               }
-               tipc_node_write_unlock(n);
+               } else
+                       tipc_node_write_unlock(n);
        }
 
        if (unlikely(rc & TIPC_LINK_UP_EVT))