From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82695C433DF for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 20:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640BE2074B for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 20:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cloudflare.com header.i=@cloudflare.com header.b="bQ+uXBtA" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726184AbgFCUjQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2020 16:39:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57204 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726076AbgFCUjQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Jun 2020 16:39:16 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62c.google.com (mail-ej1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D8630C08C5C1 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 13:39:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id k11so3613711ejr.9 for ; Wed, 03 Jun 2020 13:39:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudflare.com; s=google; h=references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=s9a3sBWiPbLX3OUXd89qCWIIhpbfPNP9FedjZfBx1Ic=; b=bQ+uXBtAdJnAm4Fb+TJk4i3yWvKleFFAhEoXwFL/ZCSiwr7DXDGK2HHdcsEvRABWOr WCcwpowg3ffTOoN0ohUiWPbY7wHQitd8d21cCYAoKgTU10Pw/bOwEBgWRQ9sgE65k9sR gQDttImW2iwzRgLGGJ3GoFy0Vj3XN1t6ZJvkY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=s9a3sBWiPbLX3OUXd89qCWIIhpbfPNP9FedjZfBx1Ic=; b=DUbKbniJ4lW7iCAX48Zhfw7P/J8OECVWEm07kfglEXBb+jGSzUboDu0kE1CZRE4TUh QmNBieGbkpsTGLvgjo8JPmn/HubdRcShNBFywn7+AsUnGY8FyBk+7xMvpsbxJAtcSeK+ utqw2tw7hKdqB5U7vOuQk0R47WPubFUCBrP7s6TIwN4HKBTPBYQ3xkg1/4HLQvqYgkh9 8au8MslIRjWlKCgopGV0z4DajCIfRxVizuBiJX5EvevkhfXOD56MQZphQA0g6q+6wAy3 THAw+Wqn3rdQ4CGSOr0gJr8Fr70iYNvlzR+poq8UhV/ilUF0UKXZEO1MG3kIrb8+3h3G tqHQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533fq+jNRGSgfCiF6caTiJZz4vXbbE+QL23nlviCxLjmh04caK/J 6lpzgttktmJgx4RcDrPgy+gZNg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwd6i9/n11XR+AmSb4TS78eKAHg9q+4Xaz3Eys3xNWzjyPQzjeoljht/UJhu2PY2f0YOpvj1Q== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2052:: with SMTP id pg18mr944564ejb.513.1591216754427; Wed, 03 Jun 2020 13:39:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cloudflare.com ([2a02:a310:c262:aa00:b35e:8938:2c2a:ba8b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n25sm353242edo.56.2020.06.03.13.39.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 03 Jun 2020 13:39:13 -0700 (PDT) References: <158385850787.30597.8346421465837046618.stgit@john-Precision-5820-Tower> <6f8bb6d8-bb70-4533-f15b-310db595d334@gmail.com> <87a71k2yje.fsf@cloudflare.com> <5ed7ed7d315bd_36aa2ab64b3c85bcd9@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> User-agent: mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 26.3 From: Jakub Sitnicki To: John Fastabend Cc: Eric Dumazet , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [bpf PATCH] bpf: sockmap, remove bucket->lock from sock_{hash|map}_free In-reply-to: <5ed7ed7d315bd_36aa2ab64b3c85bcd9@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 22:39:12 +0200 Message-ID: <878sh33mvj.fsf@cloudflare.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 03, 2020 at 08:35 PM CEST, John Fastabend wrote: > Jakub Sitnicki wrote: [...] >> I'm not sure that the check for map->refcnt when sock is unlinking >> itself from the map will do it. I worry we will then have issues when >> sockhash is unlinking itself from socks (so the other way around) in >> sock_hash_free(). We could no longer assume that the sock & psock >> exists. >> >> What comes to mind is to reintroduce the spin-lock protected critical >> section in sock_hash_free(), but delay the processing of sockets to be >> unlinked from sockhash. We could grab a ref to sk_psock while holding a >> spin-lock and unlink it while no longer in atomic critical section. > > It seems so. In sock_hash_free we logically need, > > for (i = 0; i < htab->buckets_num; i++) { > hlist_for_each_entryy_safe(...) { > hlist_del_rcu() <- detached from bucket and no longer reachable Just to confirm - synchronize_rcu() doesn't prevent sock_hash_delete_from_link() from getting as far as hlist_del_rcu(), that is here [0], while on another cpu sock_hash_free() is also performing hlist_del_rcu(). That is, reintroducing the spin-lock is needed, right? Otherwise we have two concurrent updaters that are not synchronized. > synchronize_rcu() > // now element can not be reached from unhash() > ... sock_map_unref(elem->sk, elem) ... > } > } > > We don't actually want to stick a synchronize_rcu() in that loop > so I agree we need to collect the elements do a sync then remove them. [...] >> >> John, WDYT? > > Want to give it a try? Or I can draft something. I can give it a try, as I clearly need to wrap my head better around this code path. But I can only see how to do it with a spin-lock back in place in sock_hash_free(). If you have an idea in mind how to do it locklessly, please go ahead. [...] [0] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/net/core/sock_map.c#L738