netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@gmail.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	fbl@redhat.com, nhorman@redhat.com, davem@redhat.com,
	Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: fix race in the receive/select
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:10:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A474FB5.4070901@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090626145027.GA6534@redhat.com>

Oleg Nesterov wrote, On 06/26/2009 04:50 PM:

> On 06/26, Davide Libenzi wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
>>
>>> And if we remove waitqueue_active() in xxx_update(), then lock/unlock is
>>> not needed too.
>>>
>>> If xxx_poll() takes q->lock first, it can safely miss the changes in ->status
>>> and schedule(): xxx_update() will take q->lock, notice the sleeper and wake
>>> it up (ok, it will set ->triggered but this doesn't matter).
>>>
>>> If xxx_update() takes q->lock first, xxx_poll() must see the changes in
>>> status after poll_wait()->unlock(&q->lock) (in fact, after lock, not unlock).
>> Sure. The snippet above was just to show what typically the code does, not
>> a suggestion on how to solve the socket case.
> 
> Yes, yes. I just meant you are right imho, we shouldn't add mb() into
> add_wait_queue().
> 
>> But yeah, the problem in this case is the waitqueue_active() call. Without
>> that, the wait queue lock/unlock in poll_wait() and the one in wake_up()
>> guarantees the necessary barriers.
>> Some might argue the costs of the lock/unlock of q->lock, and wonder if
>> MBs are a more efficient solution. This is something I'm not going into.
>> To me, it just looked not right having cross-matching MB in different
>> subsystems.
> 
> This is subjective and thus up to maintainers, but personally I think you
> are very, very right.
> 
> Perhaps we can add
> 
> 	void sock_poll_wait(struct file *file, struct sock *sk, poll_table *pt)
> 	{
> 		if (pt) {
> 			poll_wait(file, sk->sk_sleep, pt);
> 			/*
> 			 * fat comment
> 			 */
> 			smp_mb(); // or smp_mb__after_unlock();
> 		}
> 	}
> 
> Oleg.


Maybe 'a bit' further?:

static inline void __poll_wait(struct file * filp, wait_queue_head_t * wait_address, poll_table *p)
{
	p->qproc(filp, wait_address, p);
}

static inline void poll_wait(struct file * filp, wait_queue_head_t * wait_address, poll_table *p)
{
	if (p && wait_address)
		__poll_wait(filp, wait_address, p);
}

static inline void sock_poll_wait(struct file * filp, wait_queue_head_t * wait_address, poll_table *p)
{
	if (p && wait_address) {
		__poll_wait(filp, wait_address, p);
		/*
		 * fat comment
		 */
		smp_mb(); // or smp_mb__after_unlock();
	}
}

Jarek P.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-06-28 11:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-06-25 12:25 [PATCH] net: fix race in the receive/select Jiri Olsa
2009-06-25 12:24 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-06-26  1:31   ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-26  1:59     ` Eric Dumazet
2009-06-26  2:04       ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-26  2:11         ` David Miller
2009-06-26  2:19         ` Eric Dumazet
2009-06-26  3:14           ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-26  5:42             ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-06-26  8:10               ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-06-26 13:57             ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-06-26 17:32               ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-26 14:50                 ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-06-26 18:12                   ` Davide Libenzi
2009-06-26 18:17                     ` David Miller
2009-06-26 19:35                       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-06-29  9:34                         ` Jiri Olsa
2009-06-28 11:10                   ` Jarek Poplawski [this message]
2009-06-28 11:22                     ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-06-28 18:04                       ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-06-28 21:48                         ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-06-29  9:27                           ` Jiri Olsa
2009-06-26 13:46           ` Oleg Nesterov
2009-06-25 23:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-06-26  1:50 ` Tejun Heo
2009-06-29  9:12 ` Andi Kleen
2009-06-29  9:24   ` Jiri Olsa
2009-06-29 16:59   ` Zan Lynx
2009-06-29 17:29     ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-01  3:39   ` Herbert Xu
2009-07-01  6:27     ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-01  7:03       ` Herbert Xu
2009-07-01  7:22         ` Andi Kleen
2009-07-01  8:31           ` Herbert Xu
2009-07-01  8:44             ` Jiri Olsa
2009-07-01 10:58               ` Herbert Xu
2009-07-01 13:07                 ` Herbert Xu

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=4A474FB5.4070901@gmail.com \
    --to=jarkao2@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@redhat.com \
    --cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=fbl@redhat.com \
    --cc=htejun@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhorman@redhat.com \
    --cc=oleg@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).