* skb_linearize @ 2012-09-16 9:17 Michael S. Tsirkin 2012-09-16 15:07 ` skb_linearize Ben Hutchings 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Michael S. Tsirkin @ 2012-09-16 9:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netdev, Herbert Xu I notice that dev_hard_start_xmit might invoke __skb_linearize e.g. if device does not support NETIF_F_SG. This in turn onvokes __pskb_pull_tail, and documentation of __pskb_pull_tail says: &sk_buff MUST have reference count of 1. I am guessing 'reference count' means users in this context, right? IIUC this is because it modifies skb in a way that isn't safe if anyone else is looking at the skb. However, I don't see what guarantees that reference count is 1 when dev_hard_start_xmit invokes linearize. In particular it calls dev_queue_xmit_nit which could queue packets on a network tap. Could someone help me understand please? Thanks! -- MST ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: skb_linearize 2012-09-16 9:17 skb_linearize Michael S. Tsirkin @ 2012-09-16 15:07 ` Ben Hutchings 2012-10-31 19:15 ` skb_linearize Michael S. Tsirkin 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Ben Hutchings @ 2012-09-16 15:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael S. Tsirkin; +Cc: netdev, Herbert Xu On Sun, 2012-09-16 at 12:17 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > I notice that dev_hard_start_xmit might invoke > __skb_linearize e.g. if device does not support NETIF_F_SG. > > This in turn onvokes __pskb_pull_tail, and > documentation of __pskb_pull_tail says: > &sk_buff MUST have reference count of 1. > > I am guessing 'reference count' means users in this context, right? > IIUC this is because it modifies skb in a way that > isn't safe if anyone else is looking at the skb. > > > However, I don't see what guarantees that reference > count is 1 when dev_hard_start_xmit invokes > linearize. In particular it calls dev_queue_xmit_nit > which could queue packets on a network tap. > > Could someone help me understand please? Reference count here means references to struct sk_buff itself. The header area and data fragments are allowed to be shared. dev_queue_xmit_nit() clones the skb for each tap, so the reference count on the original skb remains 1. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: skb_linearize 2012-09-16 15:07 ` skb_linearize Ben Hutchings @ 2012-10-31 19:15 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2012-10-31 21:03 ` skb_linearize Ben Hutchings 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Michael S. Tsirkin @ 2012-10-31 19:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ben Hutchings; +Cc: netdev, Herbert Xu On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 04:07:12PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sun, 2012-09-16 at 12:17 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > I notice that dev_hard_start_xmit might invoke > > __skb_linearize e.g. if device does not support NETIF_F_SG. > > > > This in turn onvokes __pskb_pull_tail, and > > documentation of __pskb_pull_tail says: > > &sk_buff MUST have reference count of 1. > > > > I am guessing 'reference count' means users in this context, right? > > IIUC this is because it modifies skb in a way that > > isn't safe if anyone else is looking at the skb. > > > > > > However, I don't see what guarantees that reference > > count is 1 when dev_hard_start_xmit invokes > > linearize. In particular it calls dev_queue_xmit_nit > > which could queue packets on a network tap. > > > > Could someone help me understand please? > > Reference count here means references to struct sk_buff itself. The > header area and data fragments are allowed to be shared. > > dev_queue_xmit_nit() clones the skb for each tap, so the reference count > on the original skb remains 1. > > Ben. Interesting. But don't skb clones share the fragment list? Maybe I misunderstand? If they do it looks like the following race would be possible: - skb is cloned and queued e.g. at socket receive queue. dataref becomes 2. - On CPU 1, skb_copy_datagram_iovec is called on clone 1, is reads nr_frags and sees value > 1. - On CPU 2, __skb_linearize is now called on clone 2, it modified the skb so nr_frags is now 0, and does put_page for all frags > 1. - On CPU 1, skb_copy_datagram_iovec will now use the previously read nr_frags > 1 and access a fragment page that was already freed. What did I miss? > -- > Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare > Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. > They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: skb_linearize 2012-10-31 19:15 ` skb_linearize Michael S. Tsirkin @ 2012-10-31 21:03 ` Ben Hutchings 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Ben Hutchings @ 2012-10-31 21:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael S. Tsirkin; +Cc: netdev, Herbert Xu On Wed, 2012-10-31 at 21:15 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 04:07:12PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Sun, 2012-09-16 at 12:17 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > I notice that dev_hard_start_xmit might invoke > > > __skb_linearize e.g. if device does not support NETIF_F_SG. > > > > > > This in turn onvokes __pskb_pull_tail, and > > > documentation of __pskb_pull_tail says: > > > &sk_buff MUST have reference count of 1. > > > > > > I am guessing 'reference count' means users in this context, right? > > > IIUC this is because it modifies skb in a way that > > > isn't safe if anyone else is looking at the skb. > > > > > > > > > However, I don't see what guarantees that reference > > > count is 1 when dev_hard_start_xmit invokes > > > linearize. In particular it calls dev_queue_xmit_nit > > > which could queue packets on a network tap. > > > > > > Could someone help me understand please? > > > > Reference count here means references to struct sk_buff itself. The > > header area and data fragments are allowed to be shared. > > > > dev_queue_xmit_nit() clones the skb for each tap, so the reference count > > on the original skb remains 1. > > > > Ben. > > Interesting. But don't skb clones share the fragment list? Yes. > Maybe I misunderstand? If they do it looks like the following race > would be possible: > > - skb is cloned and queued e.g. at socket receive queue. > dataref becomes 2. > - On CPU 1, skb_copy_datagram_iovec is called on clone 1, is reads nr_frags and sees > value > 1. > - On CPU 2, __skb_linearize is now called on clone 2, it modified the > skb so nr_frags is now 0, and does put_page for all frags > 1. > - On CPU 1, skb_copy_datagram_iovec will now use the previously read > nr_frags > 1 and access a fragment page that was already freed. > > What did I miss? __skb_linearize() calls __pskb_pull_tail(), which starts with: if (eat > 0 || skb_cloned(skb)) { if (pskb_expand_head(skb, 0, eat > 0 ? eat + 128 : 0, GFP_ATOMIC)) return NULL; } pskb_expand_head() will then create a new unshared head area for the skb being linearised, and will add a reference to each fragment page (skb_frag_ref()). __pskb_pull_tail() unreferences the pages later, as you say, but this all cancels out. (pskb_expand_head() will also cancel zero-copy (skb_orphan_frags() -> skb_copy_ubufs()), which seems like it should be done only after the head area has been unshared. But skb_clone() will also do that, so I don't know how the zero-copy flag would still be set on a cloned skb.) Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-10-31 21:03 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2012-09-16 9:17 skb_linearize Michael S. Tsirkin 2012-09-16 15:07 ` skb_linearize Ben Hutchings 2012-10-31 19:15 ` skb_linearize Michael S. Tsirkin 2012-10-31 21:03 ` skb_linearize Ben Hutchings
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).