public inbox for stable@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Duyck, Alexander H" <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
To: "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
	"brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "dipankar@linux.vnet.ibm.com" <dipankar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"michaele@au1.ibm.com" <michaele@au1.ibm.com>,
	"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
	"intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org"
	<intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
	"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
	"brking@pobox.com" <brking@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 0/7] [RESEND] [net] intel: Use smp_rmb rather than read_barrier_depends
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2017 21:09:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1510866549.28435.26.camel@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f360a8cd-518c-1df5-5ffd-91a0e9688ce2@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Thu, 2017-11-16 at 14:03 -0600, Brian King wrote:
> On 11/16/2017 01:33 PM, Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 09:37:48 -0600
> > Brian King <brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Resending as the first attempt is not showing up in the list archive.
> > > 
> > > This patch converts several network drivers to use smp_rmb
> > > rather than read_barrier_depends. The initial issue was
> > > discovered with ixgbe on a Power machine which resulted
> > > in skb list corruption due to fetching a stale skb pointer.
> > > More details can be found in the ixgbe patch description.
> > 
> > Thanks for the fix Brian, I bet it was a tough debug.
> > 
> > The only users in the entire kernel of read_barrier_depends() (not
> > smp_read_barrier_depends) are the Intel network drivers.
> > 
> > Wouldn't it be better for power to just fix read_barrier_depends to do
> > the right thing on power? The question I'm not sure of the answer to is:
> > Is it really the wrong barrier to be using or is the implementation in
> > the kernel powerpc wrong?
> > 
> > So I think the right thing might actually to be to:
> > Fix arch powerpc read_barrier_depends to not be a noop, as the
> > semantics of the read_barrier_depends seems to be sufficient to solve
> > this problem, but it seems not to work for powerpc?
> 
> Jesse,
> 
> Thanks for the quick response.
> 
> Cc'ing linuxppc-dev as well. 
> 
> I did think about changing the powerpc definition of read_barrier_depends,
> but after reading up on that barrier, decided it was not the correct barrier
> to be used in this context. Here is some good historical background on
> read_barrier_depends that I found, along with an example.
> 
> https://lwn.net/Articles/5159/
> 
> Since there is no data-dependency in the code in question here, I think
> the smp_rmb is the proper barrier to use.
> 
> For background, the code in question looks like this:
> 
> CPU 1                                   CPU2
> ============================            ============================
> 1: ixgbe_xmit_frame_ring                ixgbe_clean_tx_irq
> 2:  first->skb = skb                     eop_desc = tx_buffer->next_to_watch
>                                          if (!eop_desc)
>                                              break;
> 3:  ixgbe_tx_map                         read_barrier_depends()
>                                          if (!(eop_desc->wb.status) ... )
>                                              break;
> 4:   wmb                                 
> 5:   first->next_to_watch = tx_desc      napi_consume_skb(tx_buffer->skb ..);
> 6:   writel(i, tx_ring->tail);
> 
> What we see on powerpc is that tx_buffer->skb on CPU2 is getting loaded
> prior to tx_buffer->next_to_watch. Changing the read_barrier_depends
> to a smp_rmb solves this and prevents us from dereferencing old pointer.
> 
> -Brian

So the barrier part I am okay with for all the drivers. I hadn't
accounted for the skb being read before next_to_watch. I was more
concerned about the descriptor ring versus buffer_info structure at the
time I made use of that.

The updates to clear tx_buffer->skb in ixgbe I am not okay with.
Basically the tell-tale sign for skb present is next_to_watch being
non-null. The extra writes add overhead and I want to avoid that at all
costs since I want to avoid as much bouncing between the xmit path and
the Tx clean-up as possible.

- Alex


  reply	other threads:[~2017-11-16 21:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-11-16 15:37 [PATCH 0/7] [RESEND] [net] intel: Use smp_rmb rather than read_barrier_depends Brian King
2017-11-16 15:37 ` [PATCH 1/7] ixgbe: Fix skb list corruption on Power systems Brian King
2017-11-16 15:37 ` [PATCH 2/7] i40e: Use smp_rmb rather than read_barrier_depends Brian King
2017-11-16 15:37 ` [PATCH 3/7] ixgbevf: " Brian King
2017-11-16 15:37 ` [PATCH 4/7] igbvf: " Brian King
2017-11-16 15:37 ` [PATCH 5/7] igb: " Brian King
2017-11-16 15:37 ` [PATCH 6/7] fm10k: " Brian King
2017-11-16 15:37 ` [PATCH 7/7] i40evf: " Brian King
2017-11-16 19:33 ` [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH 0/7] [RESEND] [net] intel: " Jesse Brandeburg
2017-11-16 20:03   ` Brian King
2017-11-16 21:09     ` Duyck, Alexander H [this message]
2017-11-16 22:01     ` Jesse Brandeburg
2017-11-16 22:57     ` Michael Ellerman
2017-11-17 16:16       ` Brian King
2017-11-17 16:50         ` Duyck, Alexander H

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=1510866549.28435.26.camel@intel.com \
    --to=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
    --cc=brking@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=brking@pobox.com \
    --cc=dipankar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
    --cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=michaele@au1.ibm.com \
    --cc=stable@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