[Bridge] unregister_netdevice: waiting for br0 to become free. Usage count = 1 (2.6.12.3)

[Jorge Dominguez <jmadom@televes.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4318 bytes --]

Hi,

This mail list provides me a lot of information about problem and I want share solution to bad refcount on bridge.

Solution is applied on kernel

https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=f3abc9b963e004b8c96cd7fbee6fd905f2bfd620

commit f216f082b2b37c4943f1e7c393e2786648d48f6f
([NETFILTER]: bridge netfilter: deal with martians correctly)
added a refcount leak on in_dev.

Instead of using in_dev_get(), we can use __in_dev_get_rcu(),
as netfilter hooks are running under rcu_read_lock(), as pointed
by Patrick.


diff --git a/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c b/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c
index 4fde742..907a82e 100644
--- a/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c 
<https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c?id=cce5a5c3029f731b5ea17a8a9a953ff742abf0d6>
+++ b/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c 
<https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/net/bridge/br_netfilter.c?id=f3abc9b963e004b8c96cd7fbee6fd905f2bfd620>
@@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ static int br_nf_pre_routing_finish(struct sk_buff *skb)
},
.proto = 0,
};
- struct in_device *in_dev = in_dev_get(dev);
+ struct in_device *in_dev = __in_dev_get_rcu(dev);

Best Regards,
Jorge.



>/  Two other recent reports are:
/>/  1. Buggy applications that hold packets in their input queue forever,
/>/     and/or netfilters.  The socket buffer's contain a reference for
/>/     packets in flight.
/
that may be it, but I am not sure which queue you are talking about,
but there is an application that is using the netfiler ip_queue to
queue packets to user space.  in this application, these packets can
be held in user space for extended periods of time (up to 30/60
seconds), and then they are either dropped or released.  Could this
possibly be creating a problem?

I don't believe that the system is using any of the VLAN code.

>/  I have found an appearant leak of a route object, which holds a
/>/  reference
/>/  to a device.  I reproduced in both 2.6.11 and 2.6.13 using 802.1Q
/>/  VLANs.
/>/  I have a patch that will print out the place of the leaked reference
/>/  against 2.6.13.
/>/
/>/  http://www.candelatech.com/oss/rfcnt.patch
/>/
/>/  Enable the feature in the Networking section of Kconfig.
/Ben, i will incorporate this patch and let you know if i turn up any
results.

thanks,
--robert

On Aug 31, 2005, at 9:37 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:

>/  On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 19:04:01 -0700
/>/  Robert Scott <rbscott at axentra.net  <https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge>> wrote:
/>/
/>/
/>>/  Hello,
/>>/
/>>/  I know that this bug has been discussed before at length on this
/>>/  mailing list, but previous post seemed to indicate that it was fixed
/>>/  before kernel 2.6.12.  I am still seeing this occasionally in kernel
/>>/  2.6.12.3.  The system is running knoppix, and IPV6 is not compiled
/>>/  into the kernel(other posts mentioned numerous problems with the IPV6
/>>/  code).  But every so often, when bringing down the bridge (it doesn't
/>>/  happen every time), the process hangs, and the following message
/>>/  appears in dmesg repeatedly:
/>>/
/>>/  'unregister_netdevice: waiting for br0 to become free. Usage count
/>>/  = 1'
/>>/
/>>/  None of the processes involved can be killed, and an attempt to run
/>>/  an ifconfig results in a process that is also waiting forever.  At
/>>/  this point the box must be rebooted forcefully.
/>>/
/>>/  Two questions.
/>>/  1. In a previous post, someone mentioned one solution was to
/>>/  commenting out the check that is hanging in the kernel.   Does this
/>>/  check preventing something terrible from happening(i assumed that it
/>>/  does), or is it safe to remove it
/>>/
/>/
/>/  Really bad idea, because if the thing that is holding the reference
/>/  like packets stuck in some dead queue, ever get processed the kernel
/>/  will die.
/>/
/>/
/>>/  2. Any ideas of something to try in order to make this repeatable?
/>>/
/>/
/>/  Two other recent reports are:
/>/  1. Buggy applications that hold packets in their input queue forever,
/>/     and/or netfilters.  The socket buffer's contain a reference for
/>/     packets in flight.
/>/
/>/  2. The VLAN code had a number of reference bugs, if you look through
/>/     recent netdev mailing list you will see the discussion.
/>/
/


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 5567 bytes --]