Re: [PATCH net-next] inet: remove rcu protection on tw_net

[Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>]

Le mercredi 14 décembre 2011 à 12:17 -0800, Eric W. Biederman a écrit :
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > commit b099ce2602d806 (net: Batch inet_twsk_purge) added rcu protection
> > on tw_net for no obvious reason.
> 
> From that commit I see:
> 
>                 sk_nulls_for_each_rcu(sk, node, &head->twchain) {
>                         tw = inet_twsk(sk);
> -                       if (!net_eq(twsk_net(tw), net) ||
> -                           tw->tw_family != family)
> +                       if ((tw->tw_family != family) ||
> +                               atomic_read(&twsk_net(tw)->count))
> 
> That atomic_read is a new dereference of twsk_net in an only rcu
> protected section.  That seems like an obvious reason to me.
> 

Absolutely not.

As I said twsk_net() cannot change in a tw lifetime.

(If it could, this code would be bogus anyway, you should use :

net = twsk_net(tw);
if (tw->tw_family != family || !net || atomic_read(&net->count))
	...

> > struct net are refcounted anyway since timewait sockets escape from rcu
> > protected sections. tw_net stay valid for the whole timwait lifetime.
> 
> What? twsk_net_set does not bump the struct net ref count.
> 

The commit I mentioned did not change anything in this respect.

> There is that stupid hold_net/release_net over designed debugging
> thinko that makes it look like we have a refcount.  We should probably
> just kill that thing.  But a time wait socket unlike a normal socket
> does not keep a network namespace alive.  Which is why we have to purge
> pending timewait sockets when a network namespace exits.
> 

Since you do a cleanup _before_ removing "struct net", you have absolute
guarantee tw_net is stable, you dont need rcu_dereference() (and implied
smb_rmb()) at all.

Why pay the price twice, once in the super heavy inet_twsk_purge()
function, once in every twsk_net() calls ?

[ By the way, rcu_dereference_raw() dubious use is another sign we dont
really know what RCU invariant is respected when calling twsk_net(tw) ]

> > This also removes a lot of sparse errors.
> 
> What is sparse saying that we are doing wrong?
> 

CONFIG_SPARSE_RCU_POINTER=y

make C=2 net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.o

  CHECK   net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c
include/net/inet_timewait_sock.h:222:16: error: incompatible types in
comparison expression (different address spaces)

[ repeat NN times ]

comparison expression (different address spaces)
include/net/inet_timewait_sock.h:222:16: error: incompatible types in
comparison expression (different address spaces)
include/net/inet_timewait_sock.h:222:16: error: incompatible types in
comparison expression (different address spaces)
include/net/inet_timewait_sock.h:222:16: error: incompatible types in
comparison expression (different address spaces)
include/net/inet_timewait_sock.h:222:16: error: too many errors



> There may be constraints that are strong enough that we can get away
> this but I am at least a little dubious.
> 

Thanks for reviewing and comments !