[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM0EoMmbcudme6=ogcUdQ1qt9MThChqy=37Ck1vhnw-4VuKmNw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2025 10:33:29 -0400
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To: William Liu <will@...lsroot.io>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, victor@...atatu.com,
pctammela@...atatu.com, pabeni@...hat.com, kuba@...nel.org,
stephen@...workplumber.org, dcaratti@...hat.com, savy@...t3mfailure.io,
jiri@...nulli.us, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, horms@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] net/sched: Restrict conditions for adding
duplicating netems to qdisc tree
BTW, you did fail to test tdc like i asked you to do. It was a trap
question - if you did run it you would have caught the issue Jakub
just pointed out. Maybe i shouldnt have been so coy/evil..
Please run tdc fully..
On Sun, Jun 22, 2025 at 3:05 PM William Liu <will@...lsroot.io> wrote:
>
> netem_enqueue's duplication prevention logic breaks when a netem
> resides in a qdisc tree with other netems - this can lead to a
> soft lockup and OOM loop in netem_dequeue as seen in [1].
> Ensure that a duplicating netem cannot exist in a tree with other
> netems.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/8DuRWwfqjoRDLDmBMlIfbrsZg9Gx50DHJc1ilxsEBNe2D6NMoigR_eIRIG0LOjMc3r10nUUZtArXx4oZBIdUfZQrwjcQhdinnMis_0G7VEk=@willsroot.io/
>
> Fixes: 0afb51e72855 ("[PKT_SCHED]: netem: reinsert for duplication")
> Reported-by: William Liu <will@...lsroot.io>
> Reported-by: Savino Dicanosa <savy@...t3mfailure.io>
> Signed-off-by: William Liu <will@...lsroot.io>
> Signed-off-by: Savino Dicanosa <savy@...t3mfailure.io>
> ---
> net/sched/sch_netem.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/sched/sch_netem.c b/net/sched/sch_netem.c
> index fdd79d3ccd8c..308ce6629d7e 100644
> --- a/net/sched/sch_netem.c
> +++ b/net/sched/sch_netem.c
> @@ -973,6 +973,46 @@ static int parse_attr(struct nlattr *tb[], int maxtype, struct nlattr *nla,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static const struct Qdisc_class_ops netem_class_ops;
> +
> +static inline bool has_duplication(struct Qdisc *sch)
> +{
> + struct netem_sched_data *q = qdisc_priv(sch);
> +
> + return q->duplicate != 0;
return q->duplicate not good enough?
> +}
> +
> +static int check_netem_in_tree(struct Qdisc *sch, bool only_duplicating,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + struct Qdisc *root, *q;
> + unsigned int i;
> +
"only_duplicating" is very confusing. Why not "duplicates"?
> + root = qdisc_root_sleeping(sch);
> +
> + if (sch != root && root->ops->cl_ops == &netem_class_ops) {
> + if (!only_duplicating || has_duplication(root))
> + goto err;
> + }
> +
> + if (!qdisc_dev(root))
> + return 0;
> +
> + hash_for_each(qdisc_dev(root)->qdisc_hash, i, q, hash) {
> + if (sch != q && q->ops->cl_ops == &netem_class_ops) {
> + if (!only_duplicating || has_duplication(q))
if (duplicates || has_duplication)
> + goto err;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +err:
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack,
> + "netem: cannot mix duplicating netems with other netems in tree");
> + return -EINVAL;
> +}
> +
> /* Parse netlink message to set options */
> static int netem_change(struct Qdisc *sch, struct nlattr *opt,
> struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> @@ -1031,6 +1071,11 @@ static int netem_change(struct Qdisc *sch, struct nlattr *opt,
> q->gap = qopt->gap;
> q->counter = 0;
> q->loss = qopt->loss;
> +
> + ret = check_netem_in_tree(sch, qopt->duplicate == 0, extack);
check_netem_in_tree(sch, qopt->duplicate, extack) ?
cheers,
jamal
> + if (ret)
> + goto unlock;
> +
> q->duplicate = qopt->duplicate;
>
> /* for compatibility with earlier versions.
> --
> 2.43.0
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists