Re: [PATCH v2] drivers:tty:pty: Fix a race causing data loss on close
On 02. 10. 20, 15:03, miny...@acm.org wrote: From: Corey Minyard If you write to a pty master an immediately close the pty master, the receiver might get a chunk of data dropped, but then receive some later data. That's obviously something rather unexpected for a user. It certainly confused my test program. Hmm, that's another instance of bugs which were fixed in the past. Like: commit f8747d4a466ab2cafe56112c51b3379f9fdb7a12 Author: Peter Hurley Date: Fri Sep 27 13:27:05 2013 -0400 tty: Fix pty master read() after slave closes and commit 0f40fbbcc34e093255a2b2d70b6b0fb48c3f39aa Author: Brian Bloniarz Date: Sun Mar 6 13:16:30 2016 -0800 Fix OpenSSH pty regression on close Ccing Peter who is involved in tty buffers a lot and Brian. It turns out that tty_vhangup() gets called from pty_close(), and that causes the data on the slave side to be flushed, but due to races more data can be copied into the slave side's buffer after that. Consider the following sequence: thread1 thread2 thread3 --- --- --- ||-write data into buffer, || n_tty buffer is filled || along with other buffers ||-pty_close() ||--tty_vhangup() This hangup is on slave, not master. This confused me initially. ||---tty_ldisc_hangup() ||n_tty_flush_buffer() ||-reset_buffer_flags() So this flushes the data (as on the toilette; see below) slave already had in its buffer. That's not nice. As I understand it, programs like ssh rely on all the data to be delivered, actually. |-n_tty_read() | |--up_read(>termios_rwsem); ||--down_read(>termios_rwsem) ||--clear n_tty buffer contents ||--up_read(>termios_rwsem) |--tty_buffer_flush_work() | |--schedules work calling| | flush_to_ldisc() | "Flush" doesn't mean "flush" as on the toilette. Here, it's "flush" meaning actually "push" (that confused you given what I read in the note about trying to remove the rwsem lock below). It simply waits for flush_to_ldisc to finish the job. ||-flush_to_ldisc() ||--receive_buf() ||---tty_port_default_receive_buf() ||tty_ldisc_receive_buf() ||-n_tty_receive_buf2() ||--n_tty_receive_buf_common() ||---down_read(>termios_rwsem) ||---__receive_buf() ||---copies data into n_tty buffer ||---up_read(>termios_rwsem) Sure, so we reset the head/tail in reset_buffer_flags (the data you miss) and queued another chunk of data (the data you get). I currently don't see how to fix this properly. Any hint appreciated. |--down_read(>termios_rwsem) |--copy buffer data to user From this sequence, you can see that thread2 writes to the buffer then only clears the part of the buffer in n_tty. The n_tty receive buffer code then copies more data into the n_tty buffer. This change checks to see if the tty is being hung up before copying anything in n_tty_receive_buf_common(). It has to be done after the tty->termios_rwsem semaphore is claimed, for reasons that should be apparent from the sequence above. Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard --- Changes since v1: Added lines to make the sequence diagram clearer. I sent a program to reproduce this, I extended it to prove it wasn't the test program that caused the issue, and I've uploaded it to: http://sourceforge.net/projects/ser2net/files/tmp/testpty.c if you want to run it. It has a lot of comments that explain what is going on. This is not a very satisfying fix, though. It works reliably, but it doesn't seem right to me. My inclination was to remove the up and down semaphore around tty_buffer_flush_work() in n_tty_read(), as it just schedules some work, no need to unlock for that. But that resulted in a deadlock elsewhere, so that up/down on the semaphore is there for another reason. The locking in the tty code is really hard to follow. I believe this is actually a locking problem, but fixing it looks daunting to me. Another way to fix this that occurred just occurred to me would be to clear all the buffers in pty_close(). -corey drivers/tty/n_tty.c | 4 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c index 1794d84e7bf6..1c33c26dc229 100644 --- a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c +++ b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c @@ -1704,6 +1704,9 @@ n_tty_receive_buf_common(struct tty_struct *tty, const unsigned char *cp, down_read(>termios_rwsem); + if (test_bit(TTY_HUPPING, >flags)) +
Re: [PATCH v2] drivers:tty:pty: Fix a race causing data loss on close
On 05. 10. 20, 13:31, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 08:03:04AM -0500, miny...@acm.org wrote: >> From: Corey Minyard >> >> If you write to a pty master an immediately close the pty master, the >> receiver might get a chunk of data dropped, but then receive some later >> data. That's obviously something rather unexpected for a user. It >> certainly confused my test program. ... > Jiri, any thoughts about this? At first glance, it looks sane to me, > but a second review would be great. Hi, I haven't had a chance to look into it yet (labsconf this week). Moving it upwards on my TODO. thanks, -- js
Re: [PATCH v2] drivers:tty:pty: Fix a race causing data loss on close
On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 08:03:04AM -0500, miny...@acm.org wrote:
> From: Corey Minyard
>
> If you write to a pty master an immediately close the pty master, the
> receiver might get a chunk of data dropped, but then receive some later
> data. That's obviously something rather unexpected for a user. It
> certainly confused my test program.
>
> It turns out that tty_vhangup() gets called from pty_close(), and that
> causes the data on the slave side to be flushed, but due to races more
> data can be copied into the slave side's buffer after that. Consider
> the following sequence:
>
> thread1 thread2 thread3
> --- --- ---
> ||-write data into buffer,
> || n_tty buffer is filled
> || along with other buffers
> ||-pty_close()
> ||--tty_vhangup()
> ||---tty_ldisc_hangup()
> ||n_tty_flush_buffer()
> ||-reset_buffer_flags()
> |-n_tty_read() |
> |--up_read(>termios_rwsem);
> ||--down_read(>termios_rwsem)
> ||--clear n_tty buffer contents
> ||--up_read(>termios_rwsem)
> |--tty_buffer_flush_work() |
> |--schedules work calling|
> | flush_to_ldisc() |
> ||-flush_to_ldisc()
> ||--receive_buf()
> ||---tty_port_default_receive_buf()
> ||tty_ldisc_receive_buf()
> ||-n_tty_receive_buf2()
> ||--n_tty_receive_buf_common()
> ||---down_read(>termios_rwsem)
> ||---__receive_buf()
> ||---copies data into n_tty buffer
> ||---up_read(>termios_rwsem)
> |--down_read(>termios_rwsem)
> |--copy buffer data to user
>
> >From this sequence, you can see that thread2 writes to the buffer then
> only clears the part of the buffer in n_tty. The n_tty receive buffer
> code then copies more data into the n_tty buffer.
>
> This change checks to see if the tty is being hung up before copying
> anything in n_tty_receive_buf_common(). It has to be done after the
> tty->termios_rwsem semaphore is claimed, for reasons that should be
> apparent from the sequence above.
>
> Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard
> ---
>
> Changes since v1: Added lines to make the sequence diagram clearer.
>
> I sent a program to reproduce this, I extended it to prove it wasn't the
> test program that caused the issue, and I've uploaded it to:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/ser2net/files/tmp/testpty.c
> if you want to run it. It has a lot of comments that explain what is
> going on.
>
> This is not a very satisfying fix, though. It works reliably, but it
> doesn't seem right to me. My inclination was to remove the up and down
> semaphore around tty_buffer_flush_work() in n_tty_read(), as it just
> schedules some work, no need to unlock for that. But that resulted
> in a deadlock elsewhere, so that up/down on the semaphore is there for
> another reason.
>
> The locking in the tty code is really hard to follow. I believe this is
> actually a locking problem, but fixing it looks daunting to me.
>
> Another way to fix this that occurred just occurred to me would be to
> clear all the buffers in pty_close().
>
> -corey
>
>
> drivers/tty/n_tty.c | 4
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> index 1794d84e7bf6..1c33c26dc229 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
> @@ -1704,6 +1704,9 @@ n_tty_receive_buf_common(struct tty_struct *tty, const
> unsigned char *cp,
>
> down_read(>termios_rwsem);
>
> + if (test_bit(TTY_HUPPING, >flags))
> + goto out_upsem;
> +
> do {
> /*
>* When PARMRK is set, each input char may take up to 3 chars
> @@ -1760,6 +1763,7 @@ n_tty_receive_buf_common(struct tty_struct *tty, const
> unsigned char *cp,
> } else
> n_tty_check_throttle(tty);
>
> +out_upsem:
> up_read(>termios_rwsem);
>
> return rcvd;
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Jiri, any thoughts about this? At first glance, it looks sane to me,
but a second review would be great.
thanks,
greg k-h
