From: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@citrix.com>
To: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/4] xen-netback: Fix handling frag_list on grant op error path
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 18:47:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53C95DCB.90806@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140718152435.GN7142@zion.uk.xensource.com>
On 18/07/14 16:24, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 08:09:49PM +0100, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>> The error handling for skb's with frag_list was completely wrong, it caused
>> double unmap attempts to happen if the error was on the first skb. Move it to
>> the right place in the loop.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@citrix.com>
>> Reported-by: Armin Zentai <armin.zentai@ezit.hu>
>> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> Cc: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
>> ---
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c b/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c
>> index 1844a47..604ff71 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c
>> @@ -1030,10 +1030,16 @@ static int xenvif_tx_check_gop(struct xenvif_queue *queue,
>> {
>> struct gnttab_map_grant_ref *gop_map = *gopp_map;
>> u16 pending_idx = XENVIF_TX_CB(skb)->pending_idx;
>> + /* This points to the shinfo of the actually checked skb, which could be
>> + * either the first or the one on the frag_list
>> + */
>
> I think "checked skb" should be "skb being checked". Feel free to
> disagree as I'm not native English speaker. :-/
>
>> struct skb_shared_info *shinfo = skb_shinfo(skb);
>> + /* If this is non-NULL, we are currently checking the frag_list skb, and
>> + * this points to the shinfo of the first one
>> + */
>> + struct skb_shared_info *first_shinfo = NULL;
>> int nr_frags = shinfo->nr_frags;
>> int i, err;
>> - struct sk_buff *first_skb = NULL;
>>
>> /* Check status of header. */
>> err = (*gopp_copy)->status;
>> @@ -1086,31 +1092,28 @@ check_frags:
>> xenvif_idx_unmap(queue, pending_idx);
>> }
>>
>> + /* And if we found the error while checking the frag_list, unmap
>> + * the first skb's frags
>> + */
>> + if (first_shinfo) {
>> + for (j = 0; j < first_shinfo->nr_frags; j++) {
>> + pending_idx = frag_get_pending_idx(&first_shinfo->frags[j]);
>> + xenvif_idx_unmap(queue, pending_idx);
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> /* Remember the error: invalidate all subsequent fragments. */
>> err = newerr;
>> }
>>
>> - if (skb_has_frag_list(skb)) {
>> - first_skb = skb;
>> - skb = shinfo->frag_list;
>> - shinfo = skb_shinfo(skb);
>> + if (skb_has_frag_list(skb) && !first_shinfo) {
>
> Will it ever come to the point that we have another skb in this skb's
> frag list? Is there any reason prevents you from looping over the
> (possible) subsequent skbs? I guess if the error is deep in the list
> it's a bit hard to bookkeep...
>
>> + first_shinfo = skb_shinfo(skb);
>> + shinfo = skb_shinfo(skb_shinfo(skb)->frag_list);
>
> In that case I would suggest you add
> BUG_ON(skb_has_frag_list(skb_shinfo(skb)->frag_list)). I think having
> more nested frag_list should be a bug in current design.
There are already 3 things which prevents this
- in count_requests we drop the packet if it has more than
XEN_NETBK_LEGACY_SLOTS_MAX slots
- in get_requests there is a BUG_ON(frag_overflow > MAX_SKB_FRAGS),
which shouldn't really due to the prev point
- in the same funciont we create a frag_list skb exactly once
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-18 17:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-17 19:09 [PATCH net 0/4] xen-netback: Fixing up xenvif_tx_check_gop Zoltan Kiss
2014-07-17 19:09 ` [PATCH net 1/4] xen-netback: Fix handling frag_list on grant op error path Zoltan Kiss
2014-07-18 15:24 ` Wei Liu
2014-07-18 17:47 ` Zoltan Kiss [this message]
2014-07-17 19:09 ` [PATCH net 2/4] xen-netback: Fix releasing frag_list skbs in " Zoltan Kiss
2014-07-18 15:24 ` Wei Liu
2014-07-17 19:09 ` [PATCH net 3/4] xen-netback: Fix releasing header slot on " Zoltan Kiss
2014-07-18 15:25 ` Wei Liu
2014-07-18 18:06 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-07-17 19:09 ` [PATCH net 4/4] xen-netback: Fix pointer incrementation to avoid incorrect logging Zoltan Kiss
2014-07-18 15:25 ` Wei Liu
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=53C95DCB.90806@citrix.com \
--to=zoltan.kiss@citrix.com \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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).