From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
virtualization@lists.osdl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] vhost-net: use lock_sock_fast() in peek_head_len()
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 23:11:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110313211129.GA10235@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1300038092.2761.41.camel@edumazet-laptop>
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 06:41:32PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le dimanche 13 mars 2011 à 18:43 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin a écrit :
> > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 05:32:07PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Le dimanche 13 mars 2011 à 18:19 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Other side is in drivers/net/tun.c and net/packet/af_packet.c
> > > > At least wrt tun it seems clear socket is not locked.
> > >
> > > Yes (assuming you refer to tun_net_xmit())
> > >
> > > > Besides queue, dequeue seems to be done without socket locked.
> > > >
> > >
> > > It seems this code (assuming you speak of drivers/vhost/net.c ?) has
> > > some races indeed.
> > >
> >
> > Hmm. Any more besides the one fixed here?
> >
>
> If writers and readers dont share a common lock, how can they reliably
> synchronize states ?
They are all supposed to use sk_receive_queue.lock I think.
> For example, the check at line 420 seems unsafe or useless.
>
> skb_queue_empty(&sock->sk->sk_receive_queue)
>
It's mostly useless: code that is called after this
does skb_peek and checks the result under the spinlock.
This was supposed to be an optimization: quickly check
that queue is not empty before we bother disabling notifications
etc, but I dont' remember at this point whether it actually gives any gain.
Thanks for pointing this out, I'll take it out I think (below).
Note: there are two places of this call in upstream: handle_rx_bug and
handle_rx_mergeable, but they are merged into a single
handle_rx by a patch by Jason Wang.
The below patch is on top.
If you like to look at the latest code,
it's here master.kernel.org:/home/mst/pub/vhost.git
branch vhost-net-next has it all.
Eric, thanks very much for pointing out these.
Is there anything else that you see in this driver?
Thanks!
vhost-net: remove unlocked use of receive_queue
Use of skb_queue_empty(&sock->sk->sk_receive_queue)
without taking the sk_receive_queue.lock is unsafe
or useless. Take it out.
Reported-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c
index 5720301..2f7c76a 100644
--- a/drivers/vhost/net.c
+++ b/drivers/vhost/net.c
@@ -311,7 +311,7 @@ static void handle_rx(struct vhost_net *net)
/* TODO: check that we are running from vhost_worker? */
struct socket *sock = rcu_dereference_check(vq->private_data, 1);
- if (!sock || skb_queue_empty(&sock->sk->sk_receive_queue))
+ if (!sock)
return;
mutex_lock(&vq->mutex);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-13 21:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-17 8:10 [PATCH 1/3] vhost-net: check the support of mergeable buffer outside the receive loop Jason Wang
2011-01-17 8:11 ` [PATCH 2/3] vhost-net: Unify the code of mergeable and big buffer handling Jason Wang
2011-01-17 8:36 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-01-18 3:05 ` Jason Wang
2011-01-18 4:37 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-01-18 7:41 ` Jason Wang
2011-01-17 8:11 ` [PATCH 3/3] vhost-net: use lock_sock_fast() in peek_head_len() Jason Wang
2011-01-17 9:33 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-01-17 9:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-03-13 15:06 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-03-13 15:52 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-03-13 16:19 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-03-13 16:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-03-13 16:43 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-03-13 17:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2011-03-13 21:11 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2011-01-17 8:46 ` [PATCH 1/3] vhost-net: check the support of mergeable buffer outside the receive loop Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-01-18 4:26 ` Jason Wang
2011-01-18 4:36 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2011-01-18 9:15 ` Jason Wang
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=20110313211129.GA10235@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.osdl.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).