linux-nfs.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
Cc: Bodo Stroesser <bstroesser@ts.fujitsu.com>, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] sunrpc/cache: remove races with queuing an upcall.
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 12:53:42 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130613025342.31861.1405.stgit@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130613025132.31861.97407.stgit@notabene.brown>

We currently queue an upcall after setting CACHE_PENDING,
and dequeue after clearing CACHE_PENDING.
So a request should only be present when CACHE_PENDING is set.

However we don't combine the test and the enqueue/dequeue in
a protected region, so it is possible (if unlikely) for a race
to result in a request being queued without CACHE_PENDING set,
or a request to be absent despite CACHE_PENDING.

So: include a test for CACHE_PENDING inside the regions of
enqueue and dequeue where queue_lock is held, and abort
the operation if the value is not as expected.

Also remove the early 'return' from cache_dequeue() to ensure that it
always removes all entries: As there is no locking between setting
CACHE_PENDING and calling sunrpc_cache_pipe_upcall it is not
inconceivable for some other thread to clear CACHE_PENDING and then
someone else to set it and call sunrpc_cache_pipe_upcall, both before
the original threads completed the call.

With this, it perfectly safe and correct to:
 - call cache_dequeue() if and only if we have just
   cleared CACHE_PENDING
 - call sunrpc_cache_pipe_upcall() (via cache_make_upcall)
   if and only if we have just set CACHE_PENDING.

Reported-by: Bodo Stroesser <bstroesser@ts.fujitsu.com>
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Bodo Stroesser <bstroesser@ts.fujitsu.com>
---
 net/sunrpc/cache.c |   40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/sunrpc/cache.c b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
index 80fe5c8..ce47f45 100644
--- a/net/sunrpc/cache.c
+++ b/net/sunrpc/cache.c
@@ -1036,23 +1036,32 @@ static int cache_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp,
 
 static void cache_dequeue(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *ch)
 {
-	struct cache_queue *cq;
+	struct cache_queue *cq, *tmp;
+	struct cache_request *cr;
+	struct list_head dequeued;
+
+	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&dequeued);
 	spin_lock(&queue_lock);
-	list_for_each_entry(cq, &detail->queue, list)
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(cq, tmp, &detail->queue, list)
 		if (!cq->reader) {
-			struct cache_request *cr = container_of(cq, struct cache_request, q);
+			cr = container_of(cq, struct cache_request, q);
 			if (cr->item != ch)
 				continue;
+			if (test_bit(CACHE_PENDING, &ch->flags))
+				/* Lost a race and it is pending again */
+				break;
 			if (cr->readers != 0)
 				continue;
-			list_del(&cr->q.list);
-			spin_unlock(&queue_lock);
-			cache_put(cr->item, detail);
-			kfree(cr->buf);
-			kfree(cr);
-			return;
+			list_move(&cr->q.list, &dequeued);
 		}
 	spin_unlock(&queue_lock);
+	while (!list_empty(&dequeued)) {
+		cr = list_entry(dequeued.next, struct cache_request, q.list);
+		list_del(&cr->q.list);
+		cache_put(cr->item, detail);
+		kfree(cr->buf);
+		kfree(cr);
+	}
 }
 
 /*
@@ -1166,6 +1175,7 @@ int sunrpc_cache_pipe_upcall(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *h)
 
 	char *buf;
 	struct cache_request *crq;
+	int ret = 0;
 
 	if (!detail->cache_request)
 		return -EINVAL;
@@ -1191,10 +1201,18 @@ int sunrpc_cache_pipe_upcall(struct cache_detail *detail, struct cache_head *h)
 	crq->len = 0;
 	crq->readers = 0;
 	spin_lock(&queue_lock);
-	list_add_tail(&crq->q.list, &detail->queue);
+	if (test_bit(CACHE_PENDING, &h->flags))
+		list_add_tail(&crq->q.list, &detail->queue);
+	else
+		/* Lost a race, no longer PENDING, so don't enqueue */
+		ret = -EAGAIN;
 	spin_unlock(&queue_lock);
 	wake_up(&queue_wait);
-	return 0;
+	if (ret == -EAGAIN) {
+		kfree(buf);
+		kfree(crq);
+	}
+	return ret;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sunrpc_cache_pipe_upcall);
 



  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-06-13  2:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-13  2:53 [PATCH 0/5] Fix assorted races in the sunrpc cache NeilBrown
2013-06-13  2:53 ` [PATCH 5/5] sunrpc: Don't schedule an upcall on a replaced cache entry NeilBrown
2013-06-13  2:53 ` [PATCH 3/5] sunrpc/cache: ensure items removed from cache do not have pending upcalls NeilBrown
2013-06-13  2:53 ` [PATCH 2/5] sunrpc/cache: use cache_fresh_unlocked consistently and correctly NeilBrown
2013-06-13  2:53 ` [PATCH 4/5] net/sunrpc: xpt_auth_cache should be ignored when expired NeilBrown
2013-06-13  2:53 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2013-07-02  0:39 ` [PATCH 0/5] Fix assorted races in the sunrpc cache J. Bruce Fields
2013-07-02  1:53   ` NeilBrown

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=20130613025342.31861.1405.stgit@notabene.brown \
    --to=neilb@suse.de \
    --cc=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=bstroesser@ts.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-nfs@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 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).