Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net: phy: Fix suspicious rcu_dereference usage

Paul Barker
2025-01-21T15:44:48Z

[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3753 bytes --]

On 21/01/2025 13:01, Kory Maincent wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 11:34:48 +0000
> Paul Barker <paul.barker.ct@bp.renesas.com> wrote:
>
>> On 21/01/2025 09:38, Kory Maincent wrote:
>>> On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 11:12:28 -0800
>>> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 15:19:25 +0100 Kory Maincent wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> I maintain that ravb is buggy, plenty of drivers take rtnl_lock
>>>> from the .suspend callback. We need _some_ write protection here,
>>>> the patch as is only silences a legitimate warning.
>>>
>>> Indeed if the suspend path is buggy we should fix it. Still there is lots of
>>> ethernet drivers calling phy_disconnect without rtnl (IIUC) if probe return
>>> an error or in the remove path. What should we do about it?
>>>
>>> About ravb suspend, I don't have the board, Claudiu could you try this
>>> instead of the current fix:
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c index bc395294a32d..c9a0d2d6f371
>>> 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>> @@ -3215,15 +3215,22 @@ static int ravb_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>> if (!netif_running(ndev))
>>> goto reset_assert;
>>>
>>> + rtnl_lock();
>>> netif_device_detach(ndev);
>>>
>>> - if (priv->wol_enabled)
>>> - return ravb_wol_setup(ndev);
>>> + if (priv->wol_enabled) {
>>> + ret = ravb_wol_setup(ndev);
>>> + rtnl_unlock();
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>>
>>> ret = ravb_close(ndev);
>>> - if (ret)
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + rtnl_unlock();
>>> return ret;
>>> + }
>>>
>>> + rtnl_unlock();
>>> ret = pm_runtime_force_suspend(&priv->pdev->dev);
>>> if (ret)
>>> return ret;
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>
>> (Cc'ing Niklas and Sergey as this relates to the ravb driver)
>
> Yes, thanks.
>
>> Why do we need to hold the rtnl mutex across the calls to
>> netif_device_detach() and ravb_wol_setup()?
>>
>> My reading of Documentation/networking/netdevices.rst is that the rtnl
>> mutex is held when the net subsystem calls the driver's ndo_stop method,
>> which in our case is ravb_close(). So, we should take the rtnl mutex
>> when we call ravb_close() directly, in both ravb_suspend() and
>> ravb_wol_restore(). That would ensure that we do not call
>> phy_disconnect() without holding the rtnl mutex and should fix this
>> issue.
>
> Not sure about it. For example ravb_ptp_stop() called in ravb_wol_setup() won't
> be protected by the rtnl lock.

ravb_ptp_stop() modifies a couple of device registers and calls
ptp_clock_unregister(). I don't see anything to suggest that this
requires the rtnl lock to be held, unless I am missing something.

> I don't know about netif_device_detach(). It doesn't seems to be the case as
> there is lots of driver using it without holding rtnl lock.

netif_device_detach() clears the present flag from the link state and
stops all TX queues, so I don't think the rtnl lock needs to be held to
call this.

>
> Indeed we should add the rtnl lock also in the resume path.
>
>> Commit 35f7cad1743e ("net: Add the possibility to support a selected
>> hwtstamp in netdevice") may have unearthed the issue, but the fixes tag
>> should point to the commits adding those unlocked calls to ravb_close().
>
> The current patch was on phy_device.c that's why the fixes tag does not point to
> a ravb commit, it will change.

Ack. Thanks for digging in to this!

--
Paul Barker

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3577 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 236 bytes --]