[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241030-hospitable-sweet-chicken-f71faa@leitao>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 08:01:21 -0700
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
To: Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@...nel.org>
Cc: kuba@...nel.org, horms@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
Mat Martineau <martineau@...nel.org>,
Geliang Tang <geliang@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, vlad.wing@...il.com, max@...sevol.com,
kernel-team@...a.com, aehkn@...hub.one, stable@...r.kernel.org,
"open list:NETWORKING [MPTCP]" <mptcp@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] mptcp: Ensure RCU read lock is held when calling
mptcp_sched_find()
Hello Matthieu,
On Wed, Oct 30, 2024 at 03:45:02PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Breno
>
> 30 Oct 2024 15:02:45 Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>:
>
> > The mptcp_sched_find() function must be called with the RCU read lock
> > held, as it accesses RCU-protected data structures. This requirement was
> > not properly enforced in the mptcp_init_sock() function, leading to a
> > RCU list traversal in a non-reader section error when
> > CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST is enabled.
> >
> > net/mptcp/sched.c:44 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
> >
> > Fix it by acquiring the RCU read lock before calling the
> > mptcp_sched_find() function. This ensures that the function is invoked
> > with the necessary RCU protection in place, as it accesses RCU-protected
> > data structures.
>
> Thank you for having looked at that, but there is already a fix:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20241021-net-mptcp-sched-lock-v1-1-637759cf061c@kernel.org/
>
> This fix has even been applied in the net tree already:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/3deb12c788c3
>
> Did you not get conflicts when rebasing your branch on top of the
> latest version?
Oh, I was testing on Linus' tree when I got the problem, and net was not
merged in Linus' tree yet.
> > Additionally, the patch breaks down the mptcp_init_sched() call into
> > smaller parts, with the RCU read lock only covering the specific call to
> > mptcp_sched_find(). This helps minimize the critical section, reducing
> > the time during which RCU grace periods are blocked.
>
> I agree with Eric (thank you for the review!): this creates other issues.
Let me comment there.
>
> > The mptcp_sched_list_lock is not held in this case, and it is not clear
> > if it is necessary.
>
> It is not needed, the list is not modified, only read with RCU.
Thanks
Powered by blists - more mailing lists