From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] af_unix: fix entry locking in unix_dgram_recvmsg
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 21:24:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zixrusxq.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151202.130244.140973474498435711.davem@davemloft.net> (David Miller's message of "Wed, 02 Dec 2015 13:02:44 -0500 (EST)")
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> writes:
> From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com>
>> Rainer Weikusat <rw@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Insofar I understand the comment in this code block correctly,
[...]
>>> /* recvmsg() in non blocking mode is supposed to return -EAGAIN
>>> * sk_rcvtimeo is not honored by mutex_lock_interruptible()
>>>
>>> setting a receive timeout for an AF_UNIX datagram socket also doesn't
>>> work as intended because of this: In case of n readers with the same
>>> timeout, the nth reader will end up blocking n times the timeout.
[...]
> So with your patch, the "N * timeout" behavior, where N is the number
> of queues reading threads, no longer occurs? Do they all now properly
> get released at the appropriate timeout?
As far as I can tell, yes. With the change, unix_dgram_recvmsg has a
read loop looking like this:
last = NULL; /* not really necessary */
timeo = sock_rcvtimeo(sk, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT);
do {
mutex_lock(&u->readlock);
skip = sk_peek_offset(sk, flags);
skb = __skb_try_recv_datagram(sk, flags, &peeked, &skip, &err,
&last);
if (skb)
break;
mutex_unlock(&u->readlock);
if (err != -EAGAIN)
break;
} while (timeo &&
!__skb_wait_for_more_packets(sk, &err, &timeo, last));
u->readlock is only used to enforce serialized access while running code
dealing with the peek offset. If there's currently nothing to receive,
the mutex is dropped. Afterwards, non-blocking readers return with
-EAGAIN and blocking readers go to sleep waiting for 'interesting
events' via __skb_wait_for_more_packets without stuffing the mutex into
a pocket and taking it with them: All non-blocking readers of a certain
socket end up going to sleep via schedule_timeout call in the wait
function, hence, each of them will be woken up once its timeout expires.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-03 21:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-29 20:59 [RFC PATCH] af_unix: fix entry locking in unix_dgram_recvmsg Rainer Weikusat
2015-12-01 17:02 ` Rainer Weikusat
2015-12-02 18:02 ` David Miller
2015-12-03 21:24 ` Rainer Weikusat [this message]
2015-12-03 21:47 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-12-03 23:06 ` David Miller
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=87zixrusxq.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com \
--to=rweikusat@mobileactivedefense.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).