* [PATCH net v2] netpoll: hold rcu read lock in __netpoll_send_skb()
@ 2025-03-06 13:16 Breno Leitao
2025-03-07 13:13 ` Simon Horman
2025-03-08 4:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Breno Leitao @ 2025-03-06 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Simon Horman, Amerigo Wang
Cc: netdev, linux-kernel, kernel-team, Breno Leitao
The function __netpoll_send_skb() is being invoked without holding the
RCU read lock. This oversight triggers a warning message when
CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST is enabled:
net/core/netpoll.c:330 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
netpoll_send_skb
netpoll_send_udp
write_ext_msg
console_flush_all
console_unlock
vprintk_emit
To prevent npinfo from disappearing unexpectedly, ensure that
__netpoll_send_skb() is protected with the RCU read lock.
Fixes: 2899656b494dcd1 ("netpoll: take rcu_read_lock_bh() in netpoll_send_skb_on_dev()")
Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
---
Changes in v2:
- Use rcu_read_lock() instead of guard() as normal people do (Jakub).
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250303-netpoll_rcu_v2-v1-1-6b34d8a01fa2@debian.org
---
net/core/netpoll.c | 9 +++++++--
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/core/netpoll.c b/net/core/netpoll.c
index 62b4041aae1ae..0ab722d95a2df 100644
--- a/net/core/netpoll.c
+++ b/net/core/netpoll.c
@@ -319,6 +319,7 @@ static int netpoll_owner_active(struct net_device *dev)
static netdev_tx_t __netpoll_send_skb(struct netpoll *np, struct sk_buff *skb)
{
netdev_tx_t status = NETDEV_TX_BUSY;
+ netdev_tx_t ret = NET_XMIT_DROP;
struct net_device *dev;
unsigned long tries;
/* It is up to the caller to keep npinfo alive. */
@@ -327,11 +328,12 @@ static netdev_tx_t __netpoll_send_skb(struct netpoll *np, struct sk_buff *skb)
lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
dev = np->dev;
+ rcu_read_lock();
npinfo = rcu_dereference_bh(dev->npinfo);
if (!npinfo || !netif_running(dev) || !netif_device_present(dev)) {
dev_kfree_skb_irq(skb);
- return NET_XMIT_DROP;
+ goto out;
}
/* don't get messages out of order, and no recursion */
@@ -370,7 +372,10 @@ static netdev_tx_t __netpoll_send_skb(struct netpoll *np, struct sk_buff *skb)
skb_queue_tail(&npinfo->txq, skb);
schedule_delayed_work(&npinfo->tx_work,0);
}
- return NETDEV_TX_OK;
+ ret = NETDEV_TX_OK;
+out:
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ return ret;
}
netdev_tx_t netpoll_send_skb(struct netpoll *np, struct sk_buff *skb)
---
base-commit: 848e076317446f9c663771ddec142d7c2eb4cb43
change-id: 20250303-netpoll_rcu_v2-fed72eb0cb83
Best regards,
--
Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net v2] netpoll: hold rcu read lock in __netpoll_send_skb()
2025-03-06 13:16 [PATCH net v2] netpoll: hold rcu read lock in __netpoll_send_skb() Breno Leitao
@ 2025-03-07 13:13 ` Simon Horman
2025-03-08 4:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2025-03-07 13:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Breno Leitao
Cc: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Amerigo Wang, netdev, linux-kernel, kernel-team
On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 05:16:18AM -0800, Breno Leitao wrote:
> The function __netpoll_send_skb() is being invoked without holding the
> RCU read lock. This oversight triggers a warning message when
> CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST is enabled:
>
> net/core/netpoll.c:330 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
>
> netpoll_send_skb
> netpoll_send_udp
> write_ext_msg
> console_flush_all
> console_unlock
> vprintk_emit
>
> To prevent npinfo from disappearing unexpectedly, ensure that
> __netpoll_send_skb() is protected with the RCU read lock.
>
> Fixes: 2899656b494dcd1 ("netpoll: take rcu_read_lock_bh() in netpoll_send_skb_on_dev()")
> Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - Use rcu_read_lock() instead of guard() as normal people do (Jakub).
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250303-netpoll_rcu_v2-v1-1-6b34d8a01fa2@debian.org
Nice that we can be normal :)
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
> ---
> net/core/netpoll.c | 9 +++++++--
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/netpoll.c b/net/core/netpoll.c
> index 62b4041aae1ae..0ab722d95a2df 100644
> --- a/net/core/netpoll.c
> +++ b/net/core/netpoll.c
> @@ -319,6 +319,7 @@ static int netpoll_owner_active(struct net_device *dev)
> static netdev_tx_t __netpoll_send_skb(struct netpoll *np, struct sk_buff *skb)
> {
> netdev_tx_t status = NETDEV_TX_BUSY;
> + netdev_tx_t ret = NET_XMIT_DROP;
> struct net_device *dev;
> unsigned long tries;
> /* It is up to the caller to keep npinfo alive. */
> @@ -327,11 +328,12 @@ static netdev_tx_t __netpoll_send_skb(struct netpoll *np, struct sk_buff *skb)
> lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled();
>
> dev = np->dev;
> + rcu_read_lock();
> npinfo = rcu_dereference_bh(dev->npinfo);
>
> if (!npinfo || !netif_running(dev) || !netif_device_present(dev)) {
> dev_kfree_skb_irq(skb);
> - return NET_XMIT_DROP;
nit: I would have set ret here rather than as part of it's declaration,
to avoid it being set twice in the non-error case.
But as this function is doing quite a lot, and moreover the compiler
probably has it's own ideas, I don' think this is a big deal.
> + goto out;
> }
>
> /* don't get messages out of order, and no recursion */
> @@ -370,7 +372,10 @@ static netdev_tx_t __netpoll_send_skb(struct netpoll *np, struct sk_buff *skb)
> skb_queue_tail(&npinfo->txq, skb);
> schedule_delayed_work(&npinfo->tx_work,0);
> }
> - return NETDEV_TX_OK;
> + ret = NETDEV_TX_OK;
> +out:
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> + return ret;
> }
>
> netdev_tx_t netpoll_send_skb(struct netpoll *np, struct sk_buff *skb)
>
> ---
> base-commit: 848e076317446f9c663771ddec142d7c2eb4cb43
> change-id: 20250303-netpoll_rcu_v2-fed72eb0cb83
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net v2] netpoll: hold rcu read lock in __netpoll_send_skb()
2025-03-06 13:16 [PATCH net v2] netpoll: hold rcu read lock in __netpoll_send_skb() Breno Leitao
2025-03-07 13:13 ` Simon Horman
@ 2025-03-08 4:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf @ 2025-03-08 4:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Breno Leitao
Cc: davem, edumazet, kuba, pabeni, horms, amwang, netdev,
linux-kernel, kernel-team
Hello:
This patch was applied to netdev/net.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:
On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 05:16:18 -0800 you wrote:
> The function __netpoll_send_skb() is being invoked without holding the
> RCU read lock. This oversight triggers a warning message when
> CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST is enabled:
>
> net/core/netpoll.c:330 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
>
> netpoll_send_skb
> netpoll_send_udp
> write_ext_msg
> console_flush_all
> console_unlock
> vprintk_emit
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [net,v2] netpoll: hold rcu read lock in __netpoll_send_skb()
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/505ead7ab77f
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-03-08 4:10 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-03-06 13:16 [PATCH net v2] netpoll: hold rcu read lock in __netpoll_send_skb() Breno Leitao
2025-03-07 13:13 ` Simon Horman
2025-03-08 4:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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).