linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [NET]: Fix possible dev_deactivate race condition
Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:35:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1192779319.27435.163.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071019053624.GA10560@gondor.apana.org.au>

On Fri, 2007-10-19 at 13:36 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 12:20:25PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> >
> > In fact this bug exists elsewhere too.  For example, the network
> > stack does this in net/sched/sch_generic.c:
> > 
> >         /* Wait for outstanding qdisc_run calls. */
> >       while (test_bit(__LINK_STATE_QDISC_RUNNING, &dev->state))
> >               yield();
> > 
> > This has the same problem as the current synchronize_irq code.
> 

> diff --git a/net/sched/sch_generic.c b/net/sched/sch_generic.c
> index e01d576..b3b7420 100644
> --- a/net/sched/sch_generic.c
> +++ b/net/sched/sch_generic.c
> @@ -556,6 +556,7 @@ void dev_deactivate(struct net_device *dev)
>  {
>         struct Qdisc *qdisc;
>         struct sk_buff *skb;
> +       int running;
>  
>         spin_lock_bh(&dev->queue_lock);
>         qdisc = dev->qdisc;
> @@ -571,12 +572,31 @@ void dev_deactivate(struct net_device *dev)
>  
>         dev_watchdog_down(dev);
>  
> -       /* Wait for outstanding dev_queue_xmit calls. */
> +       /* Wait for outstanding qdisc-less dev_queue_xmit calls. */
>         synchronize_rcu();
>  
>         /* Wait for outstanding qdisc_run calls. */
> -       while (test_bit(__LINK_STATE_QDISC_RUNNING, &dev->state))
> -               yield();
> +       do {
> +               while (test_bit(__LINK_STATE_QDISC_RUNNING, &dev->state))
> +                       yield();
> +

Ouch!, is there really no sane locking alternative? Hashed waitqueues
like for the page lock come to mind.

> +               /*
> +                * Double-check inside queue lock to ensure that all effects
> +                * of the queue run are visible when we return.
> +                */
> +               spin_lock_bh(&dev->queue_lock);
> +               running = test_bit(__LINK_STATE_QDISC_RUNNING, &dev->state);
> +               spin_unlock_bh(&dev->queue_lock);
> +
> +               /*
> +                * The running flag should never be set at this point because
> +                * we've already set dev->qdisc to noop_qdisc *inside* the same
> +                * pair of spin locks.  That is, if any qdisc_run starts after
> +                * our initial test it should see the noop_qdisc and then
> +                * clear the RUNNING bit before dropping the queue lock.  So
> +                * if it is set here then we've found a bug.
> +                */
> +       } while (WARN_ON_ONCE(running));
>  }
>  
>  void dev_init_scheduler(struct net_device *dev) 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-10-19  7:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-18  1:25 [PATCH] synchronize_irq needs a barrier Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-18  1:45 ` Andrew Morton
2007-10-18  1:55   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-18  2:12 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-18  2:40   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-18  2:57     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-18 14:56       ` Herbert Xu
2007-10-18 22:05         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-18 22:52           ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-18 23:17             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-18 23:39               ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-18 23:52                 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-19  2:32                 ` Herbert Xu
2007-10-19  2:52                   ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-19  3:28                     ` Herbert Xu
2007-10-19  4:49                       ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-19  2:55                   ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-19  3:26                     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-19  4:11                       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-19  4:26                         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-19  5:53                           ` Herbert Xu
2007-10-19  4:20                       ` Herbert Xu
2007-10-19  4:29                         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-19  4:35                         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-19  4:48                         ` Herbert Xu
2007-10-19  4:58                           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-21 21:10                             ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-23  3:26                               ` [IRQ]: Fix synchronize_irq races with IRQ handler Herbert Xu
2007-10-19  5:36                         ` [NET]: Fix possible dev_deactivate race condition Herbert Xu
2007-10-19  5:38                           ` David Miller
2007-10-19  7:35                           ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2007-10-19  9:29                             ` Herbert Xu
2007-10-18 14:35     ` [PATCH] synchronize_irq needs a barrier Herbert Xu
2007-10-18 21:35       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-20  2:02 ` Maxim Levitsky
2007-10-20  2:25   ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-20  3:10     ` Maxim Levitsky
2007-10-20  4:06       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-20  4:04     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-20  4:09       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-20  3:37   ` Herbert Xu
2007-10-20  3:56   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-20  4:24     ` Maxim Levitsky
2007-10-20  5:04       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-20  5:36         ` Maxim Levitsky
2007-10-20  5:46           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2007-10-20  6:06             ` Maxim Levitsky
2007-10-20  6:13               ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt

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=1192779319.27435.163.camel@twins \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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).