netdev - Re: [PATCH net 0/2] bond: fix xfrm offload feature during init

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: <Z47jVoQdO9sD19TB@fedora>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2025 23:59:18 +0000
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Cosmin Ratiu <cratiu@...dia.com>
Cc: "steffen.klassert@...unet.com" <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
	"shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>,
	"andrew+netdev@...n.ch" <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"jv@...sburgh.net" <jv@...sburgh.net>,
	"sd@...asysnail.net" <sd@...asysnail.net>,
	"andy@...yhouse.net" <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	"razor@...ckwall.org" <razor@...ckwall.org>,
	Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>,
	"horms@...nel.org" <horms@...nel.org>,
	"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
	Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
	"herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 0/2] bond: fix xfrm offload feature during init

On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 04:16:49PM +0000, Cosmin Ratiu wrote:
> On Fri, 2025-01-17 at 08:54 +0100, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> > > 
> > > Hi Jianbo,
> > > 
> > > I talked with Sabrina and it looks we can't simply do this. Because
> > > both
> > > xfrm_add_sa_expire() and xfrm_timer_handler() calling
> > > __xfrm_state_delete() under
> > > spin lock. If we move the xfrm_dev_state_delete() out of
> > > __xfrm_state_delete(),
> > > all the places need to be handled correctly.
> > > 
> > > At the same time xfrm_timer_handler() calling
> > > xfrm_dev_state_update_stats before
> > > __xfrm_state_delete(). Should we also take care of it to make sure
> > > the state
> > > change and delete are called at the same time?
> > > 
> > > Hi Steffen, do you have any comments?
> > 
> > Can't you just fix this in bonding? xfrm_timer_handler() can't sleep
> > anyway, even if you remove the spinlock, it is a timer function.
> > 
> 
> I am not sure this can be fixed in bonding given that the
> xdo_dev_state_delete op could, in the general case, sleep while talking
> to the hardware. I don't think it's reasonable to expect devices to
> offload xfrm while the kernel holds a spinlock.
> Bonding just exposed this assumption mismatch because of the mutex that
> was added to replace a spinlock which exhibited the same problem we are
> talking about here.
> 
> Do the dev offload operations need to be synchronous? Couldn't
> __xfrm_state_delete instead schedule a wq to do the dev offload? I saw
> there's already an xfrm_state_gc_task that's invoked to call
> xfrm_dev_state_free, perhaps that could be used to do the delete as
> well?

Yes, I have tried to move the bonding gc work in bond_ipsec_del_sa() to a wq
in https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/Z33nEKg4PxwReUu_@fedora/. i.e. move the
following part out of spin lock via wq.

        mutex_lock(&bond->ipsec_lock);
        list_for_each_entry(ipsec, &bond->ipsec_list, list) {
                if (ipsec->xs == xs) {
                        list_del(&ipsec->list);
                        kfree(ipsec);
                        break;
                }
        }
        mutex_unlock(&bond->ipsec_lock);

But we can see there is an (ipsec->xs == xs). So we still need to make
sure the xs is not released. Can we add a xs reference in bond_ipsec_del_sa()
to achieve this?

Thanks
Hangbin