> -----Original Message-----
> From: Igor Druzhinin [mailto:igor.druzhi...@citrix.com]
> Sent: 03 March 2017 20:23
> To: net...@vger.kernel.org; xen-de...@lists.xenproject.org
> Cc: Paul Durrant <paul.durr...@citrix.com>; jgr...@suse.com; Wei Liu
> <wei.l...@citrix.com>; Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhi...@citrix.com>
> Subject: [PATCH net v2] xen-netback: fix race condition on XenBus
> disconnect
>
> In some cases during XenBus disconnect event handling and subsequent
> queue resource release there may be some TX handlers active on
> other processors. Use RCU in order to synchronize with them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Igor Druzhinin <igor.druzhi...@citrix.com>
> ---
> v2:
> * Add protection for xenvif_get_ethtool_stats
> * Additional comments and fixes
> ---
> drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c | 2 +-
> drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
> 3 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c b/drivers/net/xen-
> netback/interface.c
> index a2d32676..266b7cd 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c
> @@ -164,13 +164,17 @@ static int xenvif_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb,
> struct net_device *dev)
> {
> struct xenvif *vif = netdev_priv(dev);
> struct xenvif_queue *queue = NULL;
> - unsigned int num_queues = vif->num_queues;
> + unsigned int num_queues;
> u16 index;
> struct xenvif_rx_cb *cb;
>
> BUG_ON(skb->dev != dev);
>
> - /* Drop the packet if queues are not set up */
> + /* Drop the packet if queues are not set up.
> + * This handler should be called inside an RCU read section
> + * so we don't need to enter it here explicitly.
> + */
> + num_queues = rcu_dereference(vif)->num_queues;
> if (num_queues < 1)
> goto drop;
>
> @@ -221,18 +225,21 @@ static struct net_device_stats
> *xenvif_get_stats(struct net_device *dev)
> {
> struct xenvif *vif = netdev_priv(dev);
> struct xenvif_queue *queue = NULL;
> + unsigned int num_queues;
> u64 rx_bytes = 0;
> u64 rx_packets = 0;
> u64 tx_bytes = 0;
> u64 tx_packets = 0;
> unsigned int index;
>
> - spin_lock(&vif->lock);
> - if (vif->queues == NULL)
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +
> + num_queues = rcu_dereference(vif)->num_queues;
> + if (num_queues < 1)
> goto out;
Is this if clause worth it? All it does is jump over the for loop, which would
not be executed anyway, since the initial test (0 < 0) would fail.
>
> /* Aggregate tx and rx stats from each queue */
> - for (index = 0; index < vif->num_queues; ++index) {
> + for (index = 0; index < num_queues; ++index) {
> queue = &vif->queues[index];
> rx_bytes += queue->stats.rx_bytes;
> rx_packets += queue->stats.rx_packets;
> @@ -241,7 +248,7 @@ static struct net_device_stats
> *xenvif_get_stats(struct net_device *dev)
> }
>
> out:
> - spin_unlock(&vif->lock);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> vif->dev->stats.rx_bytes = rx_bytes;
> vif->dev->stats.rx_packets = rx_packets;
> @@ -377,10 +384,16 @@ static void xenvif_get_ethtool_stats(struct
> net_device *dev,
> struct ethtool_stats *stats, u64 * data)
> {
> struct xenvif *vif = netdev_priv(dev);
> - unsigned int num_queues = vif->num_queues;
> + unsigned int num_queues;
> int i;
> unsigned int queue_index;
>
> + rcu_read_lock();
> +
> + num_queues = rcu_dereference(vif)->num_queues;
> + if (num_queues < 1)
> + goto out;
> +
You have introduced a semantic change with the above if clause. The
xenvif_stats array was previously zeroed if num_queues < 1. It appears that
ethtool does actually allocate a zeroed array to pass in here, but I wonder
whether it is still safer to have this function zero it anyway.
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(xenvif_stats); i++) {
> unsigned long accum = 0;
> for (queue_index = 0; queue_index < num_queues;
> ++queue_index) {
> @@ -389,6 +402,8 @@ static void xenvif_get_ethtool_stats(struct
> net_device *dev,
> }
> data[i] = accum;
> }
> +out:
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> }
>
> static void xenvif_get_strings(struct net_device *dev, u32 stringset, u8 *
> data)
> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c b/drivers/net/xen-
> netback/netback.c
> index f9bcf4a..62fa74d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c
> @@ -214,7 +214,7 @@ static void xenvif_fatal_tx_err(struct xenvif *vif)
> netdev_err(vif->dev, "fatal error; disabling device\n");
> vif->disabled = true;
> /* Disable the vif from queue 0's kthread */
> - if (vif->queues)
> + if (vif->num_queues > 0)
num_queues is unsigned so this check should not be > 0. It would be better
simply to do:
if (vif->num_queues)
Paul
> xenvif_kick_thread(&vif->queues[0]);
> }
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c b/drivers/net/xen-
> netback/xenbus.c
> index d2d7cd9..a56d3ea 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c
> @@ -495,26 +495,26 @@ static void backend_disconnect(struct
> backend_info *be)
> struct xenvif *vif = be->vif;
>
> if (vif) {
> + unsigned int num_queues = vif->num_queues;
> unsigned int queue_index;
> - struct xenvif_queue *queues;
>
> xen_unregister_watchers(vif);
> #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS
> xenvif_debugfs_delif(vif);
> #endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_FS */
> xenvif_disconnect_data(vif);
> - for (queue_index = 0;
> - queue_index < vif->num_queues;
> - ++queue_index)
> - xenvif_deinit_queue(&vif->queues[queue_index]);
>
> - spin_lock(&vif->lock);
> - queues = vif->queues;
> + /* At this point some of the handlers may still be active
> + * so we need to have additional synchronization here.
> + */
> vif->num_queues = 0;
> - vif->queues = NULL;
> - spin_unlock(&vif->lock);
> + synchronize_net();
>
> - vfree(queues);
> + for (queue_index = 0; queue_index < num_queues;
> ++queue_index)
> + xenvif_deinit_queue(&vif->queues[queue_index]);
> +
> + vfree(vif->queues);
> + vif->queues = NULL;
>
> xenvif_disconnect_ctrl(vif);
> }
> --
> 1.8.3.1
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
