From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: RCU problems in fib_table_insert Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 14:37:03 -0700 Message-ID: <20100321213703.GD2517@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20100321202525.GA966@basil.fritz.box> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: robert.olsson@its.uu.se, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Andi Kleen Return-path: Received: from e8.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.138]:39408 "EHLO e8.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752324Ab0CUVhM (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:37:12 -0400 Received: from d01relay06.pok.ibm.com (d01relay06.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.116]) by e8.ny.us.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o2LLSaRC029645 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:28:36 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (d01av04.pok.ibm.com [9.56.224.64]) by d01relay06.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id o2LLb6Zm1847486 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:37:06 -0400 Received: from d01av04.pok.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d01av04.pok.ibm.com (8.14.3/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id o2LLb5gX014936 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2010 17:37:06 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100321202525.GA966@basil.fritz.box> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 09:25:25PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote: > Hi, > > I got the following warning at boot with a 2.6.34-rc2ish git kernel > with RCU debugging and preemption enabled. > > It seems the problem is that not all callers of fib_find_node > call it with rcu_read_lock() to stabilize access to the fib. > > I tried to fix it, but especially for fib_table_insert() that's rather > tricky: it does a lot of memory allocations and also route flushing and > other blocking operations while assuming the original fa is RCU stable. > > I first tried to move some allocations to the beginning and keep > preemption disabled in the rest, but it's difficult with all of them. > No patch because of that. > > Does the fa need an additional reference count for this problem? > Or perhaps some optimistic locking? > > -Andi > > > ================================================== > [ INFO: suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage. ] > --------------------------------------------------- > /home/lsrc/git/linux-2.6/net/ipv4/fib_trie.c:964 invoked rcu_dereference_check() without protection! > > other info that might help us debug this: > > > rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 0 > 2 locks held by ip/4521: > #0: (rtnl_mutex){+.+.+.}, at: [] rtnetlink_rcv+0x1f/0x40 > #1: ((inetaddr_chain).rwsem){.+.+.+}, at: [] __blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x47/0x90 Looks to me like a false positive: If I rememeber correctly, it is OK to invoke the fib-trie functions either inside an RCU read-side critical section or with RTNL held. However, I must defer to the networking guys. For one thing, things might have changed since I last looked at this code. But if I am correct, the following patch should work. If I am wrong, this patch will instead incorrectly enforce my misconceptions. ;-) Thanx, Paul ------------------------------------------------------------------------ net: suppress lockdep-RCU false positive in FIB trie. Allow fib_find_node() to be called either under rcu_read_lock() protection or with RTNL held. Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney --- fib_trie.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/net/ipv4/fib_trie.c b/net/ipv4/fib_trie.c index af5d897..01ef8ba 100644 --- a/net/ipv4/fib_trie.c +++ b/net/ipv4/fib_trie.c @@ -961,7 +961,9 @@ fib_find_node(struct trie *t, u32 key) struct node *n; pos = 0; - n = rcu_dereference(t->trie); + n = rcu_dereference_check(t->trie, + rcu_read_lock_held() || + lockdep_rtnl_is_held()); while (n != NULL && NODE_TYPE(n) == T_TNODE) { tn = (struct tnode *) n;