public inbox for linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
To: Devesh Sharma <devesh.sharma-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
	Yishai Hadas <yishaih-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] IB/uverbs: Fix race between uverbs_close and remove_one
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 11:48:14 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160314174814.GB5240@obsidianresearch.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANjDDBiN8X-Efgp6s2wyT1G6fpQZjdreW0pnnBG71E9jjhy-YA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>

On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:10:33AM +0530, Devesh Sharma wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 2:15 AM, Jason Gunthorpe
> <jgunthorpe-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 10:18:47AM -0500, Devesh Sharma wrote:
> > > CC: Yishai Hadas <yishaih-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
> >
> > I'm still pretty convinced this is wrong... But even still:
> >
> > > @@ -954,6 +955,17 @@ static int ib_uverbs_close(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> > >       struct ib_uverbs_file *file = filp->private_data;
> > >       struct ib_uverbs_device *dev = file->device;
> > >       struct ib_ucontext *ucontext = NULL;
> > > +     struct ib_device *ib_dev;
> > > +     int srcu_key;
> > > +
> > > +     srcu_key = srcu_read_lock(&dev->disassociate_srcu);
> > > +     ib_dev = srcu_dereference(dev->ib_dev,
> > > +                               &dev->disassociate_srcu);
> > > +     if (!ib_dev) {
> > > +             srcu_read_unlock(&dev->disassociate_srcu, srcu_key);
> > > +             wait_for_completion(&file->fcomp);
> > > +             goto out;
> >
> > This jumps over this:
> 
> I am not sure, to my mind kref_put(...,ib_uverbs_release_file) should
> also be skipped.

I am talking about ib_uverbs_release_event_file

> Because, by putting an wait_for_completion(), this context is
> effectively waiting for ib_uverbs_cleanup_ucontext to finish
> cleaning up this file pointer. if the other thread is cleaning up,
> why do I need to put the kerf again?

The other context doesn't do a balancing kref_put(..,ib_uverbs_release_event_file).

> > As I've said, I'm not sure how this is any different from using
> > lists_mutex. The wait_for_completion will still block and deadlock if
> > ib_uverbs_close is entered during the disassociate flow.
> 
> Taking list-mutex is not stopping ib_dev pointer to become NULL, while
> if we split the mutex

I don't think you understand the problem. ib_uverbs_device->ib_dev can
be NULL just fine. In fact, it is always NULL when
ib_uverbs_free_hw_resources calls ib_uverbs_cleanup_ucontext - that is
obviously fine (or if it isn't fine today, there is yet another bug).

The issue appears to be that ib_uverbs_free_hw_resources does not wait
for ib_uverbs_cleanup_ucontext to complete before it goes ahead and
wrecks the ib_dev, resulting in use-after-free/etc on copies of ib_dev
pointer that are used by the still running ib_uverbs_free_hw_resources.

> and wait_for_completion(), then effectively we are trying to sync
> ib_uverb_close() and
> remove_one() in such a way that no ib_uverb_close context hit ib_dev = NULL

No, that is the wrong problem statement and wrong solution.

The solution is to strong fence ib_uverbs_cleanup_ucontext so that
ib_uverbs_free_hw_resources does not exit until it is completed,
either by its thread or in the close thread.

I prefer a mutex, but perhaps there are other ways to build the
fence (eg uverbs_dev->refcount springs to mind)

> Can you please explain how it can lead to a deadlock?

Yishai's note outlines it:

		/* We must release the mutex before going ahead and calling
		 * disassociate_ucontext. disassociate_ucontext might end up
		 * indirectly calling uverbs_close, for example due to freeing
		 * the resources (e.g mmput).

Meaning when we call ib_uverbs_cleanup_ucontext from within
ib_uverbs_free_hw_resources it may recurse down into ib_uverbs_close.

If this happens, with your patch ib_uverbs_close will wait on the
completion in the same thread that is supposed to trigger it. That is
the same deadlock as would happen if the lists_mutex would be used.

The last patch I sent is much closer to what is needed, it is
just completely wrong to try and use the srcu for this.

Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-03-14 17:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-12 15:18 [PATCH V4] IB/uverbs: Fix race between uverbs_close and remove_one Devesh Sharma
     [not found] ` <1457795927-16634-1-git-send-email-devesh.sharma-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-12 20:45   ` Jason Gunthorpe
     [not found]     ` <20160312204502.GA8346-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-14  5:40       ` Devesh Sharma
     [not found]         ` <CANjDDBiN8X-Efgp6s2wyT1G6fpQZjdreW0pnnBG71E9jjhy-YA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-14 17:48           ` Jason Gunthorpe [this message]
     [not found]             ` <20160314174814.GB5240-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-15  9:00               ` Devesh Sharma
     [not found]                 ` <CANjDDBhVH10=0nSr0q4P4imAX6YrFBhE7QEd4ccRe2yUhN0pQQ-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-15  9:03                   ` Devesh Sharma
2016-03-15 20:31                   ` Jason Gunthorpe
     [not found]                     ` <20160315203112.GA2786-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-17 16:08                       ` Devesh Sharma
     [not found]                         ` <CANjDDBj8aZTeAfwxFuyk9r=kdihfxpxDA69-c4uVxkvcAfXViw-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-17 16:12                           ` Jason Gunthorpe
     [not found]                             ` <20160317161237.GB19501-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-17 16:31                               ` Devesh Sharma
     [not found]                                 ` <CANjDDBhYH7HsUyP8-Ko7G0tnWxYDGYCGgaC4HK0Eod_isvoWAA-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-17 16:48                                   ` Jason Gunthorpe
     [not found]                                     ` <20160317164831.GI19501-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2016-03-21  8:59                                       ` Haggai Eran
2016-04-26 14:33                                       ` Doug Ledford
     [not found]                                         ` <571F7C41.70700-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2016-04-26 15:18                                           ` Jason Gunthorpe
     [not found]                                             ` <20160426151851.GC24104-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
2016-04-26 15:27                                               ` Doug Ledford

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=20160314174814.GB5240@obsidianresearch.com \
    --to=jgunthorpe-epgobjl8dl3ta4ec/59zmfatqe2ktcn/@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=devesh.sharma-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
    --cc=yishaih-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.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