LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] vsock/virtio: fix flush of works during the .remove()
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 17:46:18 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c9998c8-1b9c-aac6-42eb-135fcb966187@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190529105832.oz3sagbne5teq3nt@steredhat>


On 2019/5/29 下午6:58, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 11:22:40AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 2019/5/28 下午6:56, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> We flush all pending works before to call vdev->config->reset(vdev),
>>> but other works can be queued before the vdev->config->del_vqs(vdev),
>>> so we add another flush after it, to avoid use after free.
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>    net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++------
>>>    1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
>>> index e694df10ab61..ad093ce96693 100644
>>> --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
>>> +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
>>> @@ -660,6 +660,15 @@ static int virtio_vsock_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>>>    	return ret;
>>>    }
>>> +static void virtio_vsock_flush_works(struct virtio_vsock *vsock)
>>> +{
>>> +	flush_work(&vsock->loopback_work);
>>> +	flush_work(&vsock->rx_work);
>>> +	flush_work(&vsock->tx_work);
>>> +	flush_work(&vsock->event_work);
>>> +	flush_work(&vsock->send_pkt_work);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>    static void virtio_vsock_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>>>    {
>>>    	struct virtio_vsock *vsock = vdev->priv;
>>> @@ -668,12 +677,6 @@ static void virtio_vsock_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>>>    	mutex_lock(&the_virtio_vsock_mutex);
>>>    	the_virtio_vsock = NULL;
>>> -	flush_work(&vsock->loopback_work);
>>> -	flush_work(&vsock->rx_work);
>>> -	flush_work(&vsock->tx_work);
>>> -	flush_work(&vsock->event_work);
>>> -	flush_work(&vsock->send_pkt_work);
>>> -
>>>    	/* Reset all connected sockets when the device disappear */
>>>    	vsock_for_each_connected_socket(virtio_vsock_reset_sock);
>>> @@ -690,6 +693,9 @@ static void virtio_vsock_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>>>    	vsock->event_run = false;
>>>    	mutex_unlock(&vsock->event_lock);
>>> +	/* Flush all pending works */
>>> +	virtio_vsock_flush_works(vsock);
>>> +
>>>    	/* Flush all device writes and interrupts, device will not use any
>>>    	 * more buffers.
>>>    	 */
>>> @@ -726,6 +732,11 @@ static void virtio_vsock_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
>>>    	/* Delete virtqueues and flush outstanding callbacks if any */
>>>    	vdev->config->del_vqs(vdev);
>>> +	/* Other works can be queued before 'config->del_vqs()', so we flush
>>> +	 * all works before to free the vsock object to avoid use after free.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	virtio_vsock_flush_works(vsock);
>>
>> Some questions after a quick glance:
>>
>> 1) It looks to me that the work could be queued from the path of
>> vsock_transport_cancel_pkt() . Is that synchronized here?
>>
> Both virtio_transport_send_pkt() and vsock_transport_cancel_pkt() can
> queue work from the upper layer (socket).
>
> Setting the_virtio_vsock to NULL, should synchronize, but after a careful look
> a rare issue could happen:
> we are setting the_virtio_vsock to NULL at the start of .remove() and we
> are freeing the object pointed by it at the end of .remove(), so
> virtio_transport_send_pkt() or vsock_transport_cancel_pkt() may still be
> running, accessing the object that we are freed.


Yes, that's my point.


>
> Should I use something like RCU to prevent this issue?
>
>      virtio_transport_send_pkt() and vsock_transport_cancel_pkt()
>      {
>          rcu_read_lock();
>          vsock = rcu_dereference(the_virtio_vsock_mutex);


RCU is probably a way to go. (Like what vhost_transport_send_pkt() did).


>          ...
>          rcu_read_unlock();
>      }
>
>      virtio_vsock_remove()
>      {
>          rcu_assign_pointer(the_virtio_vsock_mutex, NULL);
>          synchronize_rcu();
>
>          ...
>
>          free(vsock);
>      }
>
> Could there be a better approach?
>
>
>> 2) If we decide to flush after dev_vqs(), is tx_run/rx_run/event_run still
>> needed? It looks to me we've already done except that we need flush rx_work
>> in the end since send_pkt_work can requeue rx_work.
> The main reason of tx_run/rx_run/event_run is to prevent that a worker
> function is running while we are calling config->reset().
>
> E.g. if an interrupt comes between virtio_vsock_flush_works() and
> config->reset(), it can queue new works that can access the device while
> we are in config->reset().
>
> IMHO they are still needed.
>
> What do you think?


I mean could we simply do flush after reset once and without 
tx_rx/rx_run tricks?

rest();

virtio_vsock_flush_work();

virtio_vsock_free_buf();


Thanks


>
>
> Thanks for your questions,
> Stefano

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-30  9:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-28 10:56 [PATCH 0/4] vsock/virtio: several fixes in the .probe() and .remove() Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-28 10:56 ` [PATCH 1/4] vsock/virtio: fix locking around 'the_virtio_vsock' Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-30  4:28   ` David Miller
2019-05-30 10:27     ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-28 10:56 ` [PATCH 2/4] vsock/virtio: stop workers during the .remove() Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-28 10:56 ` [PATCH 3/4] vsock/virtio: fix flush of works " Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-29  3:22   ` Jason Wang
2019-05-29 10:58     ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-30  9:46       ` Jason Wang [this message]
2019-05-30 10:10         ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-30 11:59           ` Jason Wang
2019-05-31  8:18             ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-31  9:56               ` Jason Wang
2019-06-06  8:11                 ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-06-13  8:57                   ` Jason Wang
2019-06-27 10:26                     ` Stefano Garzarella
2019-05-28 10:56 ` [PATCH 4/4] vsock/virtio: free used buffers " Stefano Garzarella
2019-06-10 13:09 ` [PATCH 0/4] vsock/virtio: several fixes in the .probe() and .remove() Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-06-27 10:05   ` Stefano Garzarella

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=8c9998c8-1b9c-aac6-42eb-135fcb966187@redhat.com \
    --to=jasowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sgarzare@redhat.com \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 3/4] vsock/virtio: fix flush of works during the .remove()' \
    /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

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).