netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	 Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	 kernel-team@meta.com, Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Subject: [PATCH net v3] netpoll: Fix deadlock in memory allocation under spinlock
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 09:37:50 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251014-fix_netpoll_aa-v3-1-bff72762294e@debian.org> (raw)

Fix a AA deadlock in refill_skbs() where memory allocation while holding
skb_pool->lock can trigger a recursive lock acquisition attempt.

The deadlock scenario occurs when the system is under severe memory
pressure:

1. refill_skbs() acquires skb_pool->lock (spinlock)
2. alloc_skb() is called while holding the lock
3. Memory allocator fails and calls slab_out_of_memory()
4. This triggers printk() for the OOM warning
5. The console output path calls netpoll_send_udp()
6. netpoll_send_udp() attempts to acquire the same skb_pool->lock
7. Deadlock: the lock is already held by the same CPU

Call stack:
  refill_skbs()
    spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock)    <- lock acquired
    __alloc_skb()
      kmem_cache_alloc_node_noprof()
        slab_out_of_memory()
          printk()
            console_flush_all()
              netpoll_send_udp()
                skb_dequeue()
                  spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock)     <- deadlock attempt

This bug was exposed by commit 248f6571fd4c51 ("netpoll: Optimize skb
refilling on critical path") which removed refill_skbs() from the
critical path (where nested printk was being deferred), letting nested
printk being calld form inside refill_skbs()

Refactor refill_skbs() to never allocate memory while holding
the spinlock.

Another possible solution to fix this problem is protecting the
refill_skbs() from nested printks, basically calling
printk_deferred_{enter,exit}() in refill_skbs(), then, any nested
pr_warn() would be deferred.

I prefer tthis approach, given I _think_ it might be a good idea to move
the alloc_skb() from GFP_ATOMIC to GFP_KERNEL in the future, so, having
the alloc_skb() outside of the lock will be necessary step.

Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Fixes: 248f6571fd4c51 ("netpoll: Optimize skb refilling on critical path")
---
Changes in v3:
- Removed the "return" before the exit labels. (Simon)
- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251014-fix_netpoll_aa-v2-1-dafa6a378649@debian.org

Changes in v2:
- Added a return after the successful path (Rik van Riel)
- Changed the Fixes tag to point to the commit that exposed the problem.
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20251013-fix_netpoll_aa-v1-1-94a1091f92f0@debian.org
---
 net/core/netpoll.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/core/netpoll.c b/net/core/netpoll.c
index 60a05d3b7c249..b8729ec1daeb8 100644
--- a/net/core/netpoll.c
+++ b/net/core/netpoll.c
@@ -232,14 +232,27 @@ static void refill_skbs(struct netpoll *np)
 
 	skb_pool = &np->skb_pool;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
-	while (skb_pool->qlen < MAX_SKBS) {
+	while (1) {
+		spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
+		if (skb_pool->qlen >= MAX_SKBS)
+			goto unlock;
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
+
 		skb = alloc_skb(MAX_SKB_SIZE, GFP_ATOMIC);
 		if (!skb)
-			break;
+			return;
 
+		spin_lock_irqsave(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
+		if (skb_pool->qlen >= MAX_SKBS)
+			/* Discard if len got increased (TOCTOU) */
+			goto discard;
 		__skb_queue_tail(skb_pool, skb);
+		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
 	}
+
+discard:
+	dev_kfree_skb_any(skb);
+unlock:
 	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&skb_pool->lock, flags);
 }
 

---
base-commit: c5705a2a4aa35350e504b72a94b5c71c3754833c
change-id: 20251013-fix_netpoll_aa-c991ac5f2138

Best regards,
--  
Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>


             reply	other threads:[~2025-10-14 16:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-10-14 16:37 Breno Leitao [this message]
2025-10-16 12:40 ` [PATCH net v3] netpoll: Fix deadlock in memory allocation under spinlock Simon Horman
2025-10-16 23:23 ` Jakub Kicinski
2025-11-03 14:12   ` Breno Leitao

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=20251014-fix_netpoll_aa-v3-1-bff72762294e@debian.org \
    --to=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    /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).