From: Paul Moore <paul.moore@hp.com>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NETLABEL: Fix an RCU warning
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2010 11:30:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201003291130.10752.paul.moore@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100329152453.GC2569@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Monday 29 March 2010 11:24:53 am Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 12:28:04PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Le jeudi 25 mars 2010 à 11:06 +0000, David Howells a écrit :
> > > Fix an RCU warning in the netlabel code due to missing rcu read locking
> > > around an rcu_dereference() in netlbl_unlhsh_hash() when called from
> > > netlbl_unlhsh_netdev_handler():
> > >
> > > ===================================================
> > > [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ]
> > > ---------------------------------------------------
> > > net/netlabel/netlabel_unlabeled.c:246 invoked rcu_dereference_check()
> > > without protection!
> > >
> > > other info that might help us debug this:
> > >
> > >
> > > rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0
> > >
> > > 2 locks held by ip/5108:
> > > #0: (rtnl_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [<ffffffff812c4a36>]
> > > rtnl_lock+0x12/0x14 #1: (netlbl_unlhsh_lock){+.+...}, at:
> > > [<ffffffff8134daa4>] netlbl_unlhsh_netdev_handler+0x1e/0x86
> > >
> > > stack backtrace:
> > > Pid: 5108, comm: ip Not tainted 2.6.34-rc2-cachefs #114
> > >
> > > Call Trace:
> > > [<ffffffff8105121f>] lockdep_rcu_dereference+0xaa/0xb2
> > > [<ffffffff8134d781>] netlbl_unlhsh_hash+0x3e/0x50
> > > [<ffffffff8134d7a1>] netlbl_unlhsh_search_iface+0xe/0x84
> > > [<ffffffff8134daaf>] netlbl_unlhsh_netdev_handler+0x29/0x86
> > > [<ffffffff81048362>] notifier_call_chain+0x32/0x5e
> > > [<ffffffff810483fe>] raw_notifier_call_chain+0xf/0x11
> > > [<ffffffff812ba924>] call_netdevice_notifiers+0x16/0x18
> > > [<ffffffff812bac22>] __dev_notify_flags+0x37/0x5b
> > > [<ffffffff812bac8c>] dev_change_flags+0x46/0x52
> > > [<ffffffff812c41af>] do_setlink+0x250/0x3cd
> > > [<ffffffff812c4ee8>] rtnl_newlink+0x2b6/0x49d
> > > [<ffffffff812c4cdd>] ? rtnl_newlink+0xab/0x49d
> > > [<ffffffff812c4c17>] rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x1b7/0x1d2
> > > [<ffffffff812c4a60>] ? rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x0/0x1d2
> > > [<ffffffff812cc1dc>] netlink_rcv_skb+0x3e/0x8f
> > > [<ffffffff812c4a59>] rtnetlink_rcv+0x21/0x28
> > > [<ffffffff812cbefe>] netlink_unicast+0x218/0x28f
> > > [<ffffffff812cc76e>] netlink_sendmsg+0x26b/0x27a
> > > [<ffffffff812a9f1d>] sock_sendmsg+0xd4/0xf5
> > > [<ffffffff81096dca>] ? might_fault+0x4e/0x9e
> > > [<ffffffff81096dca>] ? might_fault+0x4e/0x9e
> > > [<ffffffff81096e13>] ? might_fault+0x97/0x9e
> > > [<ffffffff81096dca>] ? might_fault+0x4e/0x9e
> > > [<ffffffff812b4122>] ? verify_iovec+0x59/0x97
> > > [<ffffffff812aa1d9>] sys_sendmsg+0x209/0x273
> > > [<ffffffff810976dc>] ? __do_fault+0x395/0x3cd
> > > [<ffffffff8109928f>] ? handle_mm_fault+0x324/0x69d
> > > [<ffffffff81051e4e>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_caller+0x10c/0x130
> > > [<ffffffff81074972>] ? audit_syscall_entry+0x17d/0x1b0
> > > [<ffffffff81364154>] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f
> > > [<ffffffff81001eeb>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > net/netlabel/netlabel_unlabeled.c | 2 ++
> > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/netlabel/netlabel_unlabeled.c
> > > b/net/netlabel/netlabel_unlabeled.c index 852d9d7..7ea64e4 100644
> > > --- a/net/netlabel/netlabel_unlabeled.c
> > > +++ b/net/netlabel/netlabel_unlabeled.c
> > > @@ -799,6 +799,7 @@ static int netlbl_unlhsh_netdev_handler(struct
> > > notifier_block *this,
> > >
> > > /* XXX - should this be a check for NETDEV_DOWN or _UNREGISTER? */
> > > if (event == NETDEV_DOWN) {
> > >
> > > + rcu_read_lock();
> > >
> > > spin_lock(&netlbl_unlhsh_lock);
> > > iface = netlbl_unlhsh_search_iface(dev->ifindex);
> > > if (iface != NULL && iface->valid) {
> > >
> > > @@ -807,6 +808,7 @@ static int netlbl_unlhsh_netdev_handler(struct
> > > notifier_block *this,
> > >
> > > } else
> > >
> > > iface = NULL;
> > >
> > > spin_unlock(&netlbl_unlhsh_lock);
> > >
> > > + rcu_read_unlock();
> > >
> > > }
> > >
> > > if (iface != NULL)
> > >
> > > --
> >
> > Sorry this is not the right fix.
> >
> > Fix is to change the dereference check to take into account the lock
> > owned here.
>
> So we need the rcu_dereference() in netlbl_unlhsh_search_iface()
> to become someething like the following?
>
> bkt_list = &rcu_dereference_check(netlbl_unlhsh,
> rcu_read_lock_held() ||
> lockdep_is_held(&netlbl_unlhsh_lock))->tbl[bkt];
>
> Or is this the wrong lock?
As Eric pointed out in response to the message above, I believe the solution
is to simply remove the rcu_dereference() call in the netlbl_unlhsh_hash()
function.
--
paul moore
linux @ hp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-29 15:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-25 11:06 [PATCH] NETLABEL: Fix an RCU warning David Howells
2010-03-25 11:28 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-03-25 11:37 ` David Howells
2010-03-25 13:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-03-25 14:10 ` Paul Moore
2010-03-29 15:24 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-29 15:30 ` Paul Moore [this message]
2010-03-29 15:58 ` Paul E. McKenney
2010-03-29 20:05 ` Paul Moore
2010-03-29 20:19 ` Eric Dumazet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201003291130.10752.paul.moore@hp.com \
--to=paul.moore@hp.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.