From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: davem@davemloft.net
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
f.fainelli@gmail.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH net 0/3] net: fix issues around register_netdevice() failures
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2021 10:40:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210106184007.1821480-1-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
This series attempts to clean up the life cycle of struct
net_device. Dave has added dev->needs_free_netdev in the
past to fix double frees, we can lean on that mechanism
a little more to fix remaining issues with register_netdevice().
This is the next chapter of the saga which already includes:
commit 0e0eee2465df ("net: correct error path in rtnl_newlink()")
commit e51fb152318e ("rtnetlink: fix a memory leak when ->newlink fails")
commit cf124db566e6 ("net: Fix inconsistent teardown and release of private netdev state.")
commit 93ee31f14f6f ("[NET]: Fix free_netdev on register_netdev failure.")
commit 814152a89ed5 ("net: fix memleak in register_netdevice()")
commit 10cc514f451a ("net: Fix null de-reference of device refcount")
The immediate problem which gets fixed here is that calling
free_netdev() right after unregister_netdevice() is illegal
because we need to release rtnl_lock first, to let the
unregistration finish. Note that unregister_netdevice() is
just a wrapper of unregister_netdevice_queue(), it only
does half of the job.
Where this limitation becomes most problematic is in failure
modes of register_netdevice(). There is a notifier call right
at the end of it, which lets other subsystems veto the entire
thing. At which point we should really go through a full
unregister_netdevice(), but we can't because callers may
go straight to free_netdev() after the failure, and that's
no bueno (see the previous paragraph).
This set makes free_netdev() more lenient, when device
is still being unregistered free_netdev() will simply set
dev->needs_free_netdev and let the unregister process do
the freeing.
With the free_netdev() problem out of the way failures in
register_netdevice() can make use of net_todo, again.
Users are still expected to call free_netdev() right after
failure but that will only set dev->needs_free_netdev.
To prevent the pathological case of:
dev->needs_free_netdev = true;
if (register_netdevice(dev)) {
rtnl_unlock();
free_netdev(dev);
}
make register_netdevice()'s failure clear dev->needs_free_netdev.
Problems described above are only present with register_netdevice() /
unregister_netdevice(). We have two parallel APIs for registration
of devices:
- those called outside rtnl_lock (register_netdev(), and
unregister_netdev());
- and those to be used under rtnl_lock - register_netdevice()
and unregister_netdevice().
The former is trivial and has no problems. The alternative
approach to fix the latter would be to also separate the
freeing functions - i.e. add free_netdevice(). This has been
implemented (incl. converting all relevant calls in the tree)
but it feels a little unnecessary to put the burden of choosing
the right free_netdev{,ice}() call on the programmer when we
can "just do the right thing" by default.
Jakub Kicinski (3):
docs: net: explain struct net_device lifetime
net: make free_netdev() more lenient with unregistering devices
net: make sure devices go through netdev_wait_all_refs
Documentation/networking/netdevices.rst | 171 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
net/8021q/vlan.c | 4 +-
net/core/dev.c | 25 ++--
net/core/rtnetlink.c | 23 +---
4 files changed, 187 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
--
2.26.2
next reply other threads:[~2021-01-06 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-01-06 18:40 Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2021-01-06 18:40 ` [PATCH net 1/3] docs: net: explain struct net_device lifetime Jakub Kicinski
2021-01-06 18:40 ` [PATCH net 2/3] net: make free_netdev() more lenient with unregistering devices Jakub Kicinski
2021-01-06 18:40 ` [PATCH net 3/3] net: make sure devices go through netdev_wait_all_refs Jakub Kicinski
2021-01-09 3:40 ` [PATCH net 0/3] net: fix issues around register_netdevice() failures patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20210106184007.1821480-1-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).