From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] af_unix: fix entry locking in unix_dgram_recvmsg
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 21:24:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zixrusxq.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151202.130244.140973474498435711.davem@davemloft.net> (David Miller's message of "Wed, 02 Dec 2015 13:02:44 -0500 (EST)")
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> writes:
> From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com>
>> Rainer Weikusat <rw@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Insofar I understand the comment in this code block correctly,
[...]
>>> /* recvmsg() in non blocking mode is supposed to return -EAGAIN
>>> * sk_rcvtimeo is not honored by mutex_lock_interruptible()
>>>
>>> setting a receive timeout for an AF_UNIX datagram socket also doesn't
>>> work as intended because of this: In case of n readers with the same
>>> timeout, the nth reader will end up blocking n times the timeout.
[...]
> So with your patch, the "N * timeout" behavior, where N is the number
> of queues reading threads, no longer occurs? Do they all now properly
> get released at the appropriate timeout?
As far as I can tell, yes. With the change, unix_dgram_recvmsg has a
read loop looking like this:
last = NULL; /* not really necessary */
timeo = sock_rcvtimeo(sk, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT);
do {
mutex_lock(&u->readlock);
skip = sk_peek_offset(sk, flags);
skb = __skb_try_recv_datagram(sk, flags, &peeked, &skip, &err,
&last);
if (skb)
break;
mutex_unlock(&u->readlock);
if (err != -EAGAIN)
break;
} while (timeo &&
!__skb_wait_for_more_packets(sk, &err, &timeo, last));
u->readlock is only used to enforce serialized access while running code
dealing with the peek offset. If there's currently nothing to receive,
the mutex is dropped. Afterwards, non-blocking readers return with
-EAGAIN and blocking readers go to sleep waiting for 'interesting
events' via __skb_wait_for_more_packets without stuffing the mutex into
a pocket and taking it with them: All non-blocking readers of a certain
socket end up going to sleep via schedule_timeout call in the wait
function, hence, each of them will be woken up once its timeout expires.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-03 21:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-29 20:59 [RFC PATCH] af_unix: fix entry locking in unix_dgram_recvmsg Rainer Weikusat
2015-12-01 17:02 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-12-02 18:02 ` David Miller
2015-12-03 21:24 ` Rainer Weikusat [this message]
2015-12-03 21:47 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-12-03 23:06 ` David Miller
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=87zixrusxq.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com \
--to=rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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.