netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] tcp/dcpp: Un-pin tw

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <xhsmho78z7d05.mognet@vschneid-thinkpadt14sgen2i.remote.csb>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 11:03:38 +0200
From: Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: dccp@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, "David S.
 Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo
 Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, mleitner@...hat.com, David Ahern
 <dsahern@...nel.org>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@...hat.com>, Tomas Glozar
 <tglozar@...hat.com>, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
 Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] tcp/dcpp: Un-pin tw_timer


Hi,

On 22/04/24 16:31, Valentin Schneider wrote:
> Apologies for the delayed reply, I was away for most of last week;
>
> On 16/04/24 17:01, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 4:33 PM Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 15/04/24 14:35, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 1:34 PM Valentin Schneider <vschneid@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> >> v4 -> v5
>>> >> ++++++++
>>> >>
>>> >> o Rebased against latest Linus' tree
>>> >> o Converted tw_timer into a delayed work following Jakub's bug report on v4
>>> >>   http://lore.kernel.org/r/20240411100536.224fa1e7@kernel.org
>>> >
>>> > What was the issue again ?
>>> >
>>> > Please explain precisely why it was fundamentally tied to the use of
>>> > timers (and this was not possible to fix the issue without
>>> > adding work queues and more dependencies to TCP stack)
>>>
>>> In v4 I added the use of the ehash lock to serialize arming the timewait
>>> timer vs destroying it (inet_twsk_schedule() vs inet_twsk_deschedule_put()).
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, holding a lock both in a timer callback and in the context
>>> in which it is destroyed is invalid. AIUI the issue is as follows:
>>>
>>>   CPUx                        CPUy
>>>   spin_lock(foo);
>>>                               <timer fires>
>>>                               call_timer_fn()
>>>                                 spin_lock(foo) // blocks
>>>   timer_shutdown_sync()
>>>     __timer_delete_sync()
>>>       __try_to_del_timer_sync() // looped as long as timer is running
>>>                        <deadlock>
>>>
>>> In our case, we had in v4:
>>>
>>>   inet_twsk_deschedule_put()
>>>     spin_lock(ehash_lock);
>>>                                           tw_timer_handler()
>>>                                             inet_twsk_kill()
>>>                                               spin_lock(ehash_lock);
>>>                                               __inet_twsk_kill();
>>>     timer_shutdown_sync(&tw->tw_timer);
>>>
>>> The fix here is to move the timer deletion to a non-timer
>>> context. Workqueues fit the bill, and as the tw_timer_handler() would just queue
>>> a work item, I converted it to a delayed_work.

Does this explanation make sense? This is the reasoning that drove me to
involve workqueues. I'm open to suggestions on alternative approaches.