LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
Cc: "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
	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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] vsock/virtio: fix flush of works during the .remove()
Date: Fri, 31 May 2019 17:56:39 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <dbc9964c-65b1-0993-488b-cb44aea55e90@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190531081824.p6ylsgvkrbckhqpx@steredhat>


On 2019/5/31 下午4:18, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 07:59:14PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 2019/5/30 下午6:10, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:46:18PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>>>> 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:
>>>>>>> @@ -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).
>>>>
>>> Okay, I'm going this way.
>>>
>>>>>            ...
>>>>>            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();
>>> My only doubt is:
>>> is it safe to call config->reset() while a worker function could access
>>> the device?
>>>
>>> I had this doubt reading the Michael's advice[1] and looking at
>>> virtnet_remove() where there are these lines before the config->reset():
>>>
>>> 	/* Make sure no work handler is accessing the device. */
>>> 	flush_work(&vi->config_work);
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Stefano
>>>
>>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20190521055650-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org
>>
>> Good point. Then I agree with you. But if we can use the RCU to detect the
>> detach of device from socket for these, it would be even better.
>>
> What about checking 'the_virtio_vsock' in the worker functions in a RCU
> critical section?
> In this way, I can remove the rx_run/tx_run/event_run.
>
> Do you think it's cleaner?


Yes, I think so.

Thanks


>
> Thank you very much,
> Stefano

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-31  9:56 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
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 [this message]
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=dbc9964c-65b1-0993-488b-cb44aea55e90@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).