All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	usamaarif642@gmail.com, riel@surriel.com, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] netpoll: Fix deadlock in memory allocation under spinlock
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 15:11:51 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aO5aJ9dN5xIIdmNE@horms.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251014-fix_netpoll_aa-v2-1-dafa6a378649@debian.org>

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 03:10:51AM -0700, Breno Leitao wrote:
> Fix a AA deadlock in refill_skbs() where memory allocation while holding
> skb_pool->lock can trigger a recursive lock acquisition attempt.
> 
> The deadlock scenario occurs when the system is under severe memory
> pressure:
> 
> 1. refill_skbs() acquires skb_pool->lock (spinlock)
> 2. alloc_skb() is called while holding the lock
> 3. Memory allocator fails and calls slab_out_of_memory()
> 4. This triggers printk() for the OOM warning
> 5. The console output path calls netpoll_send_udp()
> 6. netpoll_send_udp() attempts to acquire the same skb_pool->lock
> 7. Deadlock: the lock is already held by the same CPU
> 
> Call stack:
>   refill_skbs()
>     spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock)    <- lock acquired
>     __alloc_skb()
>       kmem_cache_alloc_node_noprof()
>         slab_out_of_memory()
>           printk()
>             console_flush_all()
>               netpoll_send_udp()
>                 skb_dequeue()
>                   spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock)     <- deadlock attempt
> 
> This bug was exposed by commit 248f6571fd4c51 ("netpoll: Optimize skb
> refilling on critical path") which removed refill_skbs() from the
> critical path (where nested printk was being deferred), letting nested
> printk being calld form inside refill_skbs()
> 
> Refactor refill_skbs() to never allocate memory while holding
> the spinlock.
> 
> Another possible solution to fix this problem is protecting the
> refill_skbs() from nested printks, basically calling
> printk_deferred_{enter,exit}() in refill_skbs(), then, any nested
> pr_warn() would be deferred.
> 
> I prefer tthis approach, given I _think_ it might be a good idea to move
> the alloc_skb() from GFP_ATOMIC to GFP_KERNEL in the future, so, having
> the alloc_skb() outside of the lock will be necessary step.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
> Fixes: 248f6571fd4c51 ("netpoll: Optimize skb refilling on critical path")
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Added a return after the successful path (Rik van Riel)
> - Changed the Fixes tag to point to the commit that exposed the problem.
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251013-fix_netpoll_aa-v1-1-94a1091f92f0@debian.org
> ---
>  net/core/netpoll.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/core/netpoll.c b/net/core/netpoll.c
> index 60a05d3b7c249..c19dada9283ce 100644
> --- a/net/core/netpoll.c
> +++ b/net/core/netpoll.c
> @@ -232,14 +232,28 @@ static void refill_skbs(struct netpoll *np)
>  
>  	skb_pool = &np->skb_pool;
>  
> -	spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
> -	while (skb_pool->qlen < MAX_SKBS) {
> +	while (1) {
> +		spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
> +		if (skb_pool->qlen >= MAX_SKBS)
> +			goto unlock;
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
> +
>  		skb = alloc_skb(MAX_SKB_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
>  		if (!skb)
> -			break;
> +			return;
>  
> +		spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
> +		if (skb_pool->qlen >= MAX_SKBS)
> +			/* Discard if len got increased (TOCTOU) */
> +			goto discard;
>  		__skb_queue_tail(skb_pool, skb);
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
>  	}
> +
> +	return;

Maybe it is worth leaving alone for clarity.
And certainly it does no harm.
But the line above is never reached.

Flagged by Smatch.

> +discard:
> +	dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
> +unlock:
>  	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
>  }
>  
> 
> ---
> base-commit: c5705a2a4aa35350e504b72a94b5c71c3754833c
> change-id: 20251013-fix_netpoll_aa-c991ac5f2138
> 
> Best regards,
> --  
> Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2025-10-14 14:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-14 10:10 [PATCH net v2] netpoll: Fix deadlock in memory allocation under spinlock Breno Leitao
2025-10-14 14:11 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2025-10-14 16:13   ` Breno Leitao

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=aO5aJ9dN5xIIdmNE@horms.kernel.org \
    --to=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=riel@surriel.com \
    --cc=usamaarif642@gmail.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.