| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ZX1sD3Eki_NQ0kC7@nanopsycho>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2023 10:21:19 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: David Wei <dw@...idwei.uk>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 1/4] netdevsim: allow two netdevsim ports to
be connected
Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 08:13:45PM CET, dw@...idwei.uk wrote:
>On 2023-12-15 03:11, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 10:24:40PM CET, dw@...idwei.uk wrote:
>>> Add a debugfs file in
>>> /sys/kernel/debug/netdevsim/netdevsimN/ports/A/peer
>>>
>>> Writing "M B" to this file will link port A of netdevsim N with port B of
>>> netdevsim M.
>>>
>>> Reading this file will return the linked netdevsim id and port, if any.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: David Wei <dw@...idwei.uk>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/net/netdevsim/bus.c | 17 ++++++
>>> drivers/net/netdevsim/dev.c | 88 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c | 6 +++
>>> drivers/net/netdevsim/netdevsim.h | 3 ++
>>> 4 files changed, 114 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/netdevsim/bus.c b/drivers/net/netdevsim/bus.c
>>> index bcbc1e19edde..1ef95661a3f5 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/netdevsim/bus.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/netdevsim/bus.c
>>> @@ -323,6 +323,23 @@ static struct device_driver nsim_driver = {
>>> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>>> };
>>>
>>> +struct nsim_bus_dev *nsim_bus_dev_get(unsigned int id)
>>
>> This sounds definitelly incorrect. You should not need to touch bus.c
>> code. It arranges the bus and devices on it. The fact that a device is
>> probed or not is parallel to this.
>>
>> I think you need to maintain a separate list/xarray of netdevsim devices
>> probed by nsim_drv_probe()
>
>There is a 1:1 relationship between bus devices (nsim_bus_dev) and nsim devices
Of course it is not. I thought I exaplained that. If you unbind (or not
bind at all), it is still in this list, however not probed.
>(nsim_dev). Adding a separate list for nsim devices seemed redundant to me when
>there is already a list for bus devices.
Again, please don't call into bus.c here.
>
>>
>>
>>> +{
>>> + struct nsim_bus_dev *nsim_bus_dev;
>>> +
>>> + mutex_lock(&nsim_bus_dev_list_lock);
>>> + list_for_each_entry(nsim_bus_dev, &nsim_bus_dev_list, list) {
>>> + if (nsim_bus_dev->dev.id == id) {
>>> + get_device(&nsim_bus_dev->dev);
>>> + mutex_unlock(&nsim_bus_dev_list_lock);
>>> + return nsim_bus_dev;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>> + mutex_unlock(&nsim_bus_dev_list_lock);
>>> +
>>> + return NULL;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> int nsim_bus_init(void)
>>> {
>>> int err;
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/netdevsim/dev.c b/drivers/net/netdevsim/dev.c
>>> index b4d3b9cde8bd..034145ba1861 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/netdevsim/dev.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/netdevsim/dev.c
>>> @@ -388,6 +388,91 @@ static const struct file_operations nsim_dev_rate_parent_fops = {
>>> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>>> };
>>>
>>> +static ssize_t nsim_dev_peer_read(struct file *file, char __user *data,
>>> + size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
>>> +{
>>> + struct nsim_dev_port *nsim_dev_port;
>>> + struct netdevsim *peer;
>>> + unsigned int id, port;
>>> + char buf[23];
>>> + ssize_t len;
>>> +
>>> + nsim_dev_port = file->private_data;
>>> + rcu_read_lock();
>>> + peer = rcu_dereference(nsim_dev_port->ns->peer);
>>> + if (!peer) {
>>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>>> + return 0;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + id = peer->nsim_bus_dev->dev.id;
>>> + port = peer->nsim_dev_port->port_index;
>>> + len = scnprintf(buf, sizeof(buf), "%u %u\n", id, port);
>>> +
>>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>>> + return simple_read_from_buffer(data, count, ppos, buf, len);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static ssize_t nsim_dev_peer_write(struct file *file,
>>> + const char __user *data,
>>> + size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
>>> +{
>>> + struct nsim_dev_port *nsim_dev_port, *peer_dev_port;
>>> + struct nsim_bus_dev *peer_bus_dev;
>>> + struct nsim_dev *peer_dev;
>>> + unsigned int id, port;
>>> + char buf[22];
>>> + ssize_t ret;
>>> +
>>> + if (count >= sizeof(buf))
>>> + return -ENOSPC;
>>> +
>>> + ret = copy_from_user(buf, data, count);
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return -EFAULT;
>>> + buf[count] = '\0';
>>> +
>>> + ret = sscanf(buf, "%u %u", &id, &port);
>>> + if (ret != 2) {
>>> + pr_err("Format for adding a peer is \"id port\" (uint uint)");
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + /* invalid netdevsim id */
>>> + peer_bus_dev = nsim_bus_dev_get(id);
>>> + if (!peer_bus_dev)
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> +
>>> + ret = -EINVAL;
>>> + /* cannot link to self */
>>> + nsim_dev_port = file->private_data;
>>> + if (nsim_dev_port->ns->nsim_bus_dev == peer_bus_dev &&
>>> + nsim_dev_port->port_index == port)
>>> + goto out;
>>> +
>>> + peer_dev = dev_get_drvdata(&peer_bus_dev->dev);
>>
>> Again, no bus touching should be needed. (btw, this could be null is dev
>> is not probed)
>
>That's fair, I can do a null check.
>
>>
>>
>>> + list_for_each_entry(peer_dev_port, &peer_dev->port_list, list) {
>>> + if (peer_dev_port->port_index != port)
>>> + continue;
>>> + rcu_assign_pointer(nsim_dev_port->ns->peer, peer_dev_port->ns);
>>> + rcu_assign_pointer(peer_dev_port->ns->peer, nsim_dev_port->ns);
>>
>> What is stopping another cpu from setting different peer for the same
>> port here, making a mess?
>
>Looking into RCU a bit more, you're right that it does not protect from
>multiple writers. Would adding a lock (spinlock?) to nsim_dev and taking that
>be sufficient here?
>
>Or what if I took rtnl_lock()?
You have multiple choices how to handle this.
>
>>
>>
>>> + ret = count;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + put_device(&peer_bus_dev->dev);
>>> + return ret;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static const struct file_operations nsim_dev_peer_fops = {
>>> + .open = simple_open,
>>> + .read = nsim_dev_peer_read,
>>> + .write = nsim_dev_peer_write,
>>> + .llseek = generic_file_llseek,
>>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> static int nsim_dev_port_debugfs_init(struct nsim_dev *nsim_dev,
>>> struct nsim_dev_port *nsim_dev_port)
>>> {
>>> @@ -418,6 +503,9 @@ static int nsim_dev_port_debugfs_init(struct nsim_dev *nsim_dev,
>>> }
>>> debugfs_create_symlink("dev", nsim_dev_port->ddir, dev_link_name);
>>>
>>> + debugfs_create_file("peer", 0600, nsim_dev_port->ddir,
>>> + nsim_dev_port, &nsim_dev_peer_fops);
>>> +
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c b/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
>>> index aecaf5f44374..e290c54b0e70 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
>>> @@ -388,6 +388,7 @@ nsim_create(struct nsim_dev *nsim_dev, struct nsim_dev_port *nsim_dev_port)
>>> ns->nsim_dev = nsim_dev;
>>> ns->nsim_dev_port = nsim_dev_port;
>>> ns->nsim_bus_dev = nsim_dev->nsim_bus_dev;
>>> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(ns->peer, NULL);
>>> SET_NETDEV_DEV(dev, &ns->nsim_bus_dev->dev);
>>> SET_NETDEV_DEVLINK_PORT(dev, &nsim_dev_port->devlink_port);
>>> nsim_ethtool_init(ns);
>>> @@ -407,9 +408,14 @@ nsim_create(struct nsim_dev *nsim_dev, struct nsim_dev_port *nsim_dev_port)
>>> void nsim_destroy(struct netdevsim *ns)
>>> {
>>> struct net_device *dev = ns->netdev;
>>> + struct netdevsim *peer;
>>>
>>> rtnl_lock();
>>> + peer = rtnl_dereference(ns->peer);
>>> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(ns->peer, NULL);
>>> unregister_netdevice(dev);
>>> + if (peer)
>>> + RCU_INIT_POINTER(peer->peer, NULL);
>>
>> What is stopping the another CPU from setting this back to this "ns"?
>> Or what is stopping another netdevsim port from setting this ns while
>> going away?
>>
>> Do you rely on RTNL_LOCK in any way (other then synchronize_net() in
>> unlock())? If yes, looks wrong.
>>
>> This ns->peer update locking looks very broken to me :/
>
>As above, would a spinlock on nsim_dev or taking rtnl_lock() in
>nsim_dev_peer_write() resolve this?
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> if (nsim_dev_port_is_pf(ns->nsim_dev_port)) {
>>> nsim_macsec_teardown(ns);
>>> nsim_ipsec_teardown(ns);
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdevsim.h b/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdevsim.h
>>> index 028c825b86db..61ac3a80cf9a 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdevsim.h
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdevsim.h
>>> @@ -125,6 +125,7 @@ struct netdevsim {
>>> } udp_ports;
>>>
>>> struct nsim_ethtool ethtool;
>>> + struct netdevsim __rcu *peer;
>>> };
>>>
>>> struct netdevsim *
>>> @@ -415,5 +416,7 @@ struct nsim_bus_dev {
>>> bool init;
>>> };
>>>
>>> +struct nsim_bus_dev *nsim_bus_dev_get(unsigned int id);
>>> +
>>> int nsim_bus_init(void);
>>> void nsim_bus_exit(void);
>>> --
>>> 2.39.3
>>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists