Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1327612 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-05 12:30 +0100 |
| Last post | 2016-02-05 12:30 +0100 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH] af_packet: Raw socket destruction warning fix Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> - 2016-02-05 12:30 +0100
| From | Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-05 12:30 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH] af_packet: Raw socket destruction warning fix |
| Message-ID | <qYMKm-7VC-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Mon, 2016-01-18 at 10:44 +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 01/18/2016 07:37 AM, Maninder Singh wrote: > > Receieve queue is not purged when socket dectruction is called > > results in kernel warning because of non zero sk_rmem_alloc. > > > > WARNING: at net/packet/af_packet.c:1142 packet_sock_destruct > > > > Backtrace: > > WARN_ON(atomic_read(&sk->sk_rmem_alloc) > > packet_sock_destruct > > __sk_free > > sock_wfree > > skb_release_head_state > > skb_release_all > > __kfree_skb > > net_tx_action > > __do_softirq > > run_ksoftirqd > > > > Signed-off-by: Vaneet Narang <v.narang@samsung.com> > > Signed-off-by: Maninder Singh <maninder1.s@samsung.com> > > Thanks for the fix. While it fixes the WARN_ON(), I believe some more > investigation is needed here on why it is happening: > > We call first into packet_release(), which removes the socket hook from > the kernel (unregister_prot_hook()), later calls synchronize_net() to > make sure no more skbs will come in. The receive queue is purged right > after the synchronize_net() already. > > packet_sock_destruct() will be called afterwards, when there are no more > refs on the socket anymore and no af_packet skbs in tx waiting for completion. > Only then, in sk_destruct(), we'll call into packet_sock_destruct(). > > So, eventually double purging the sk_receive_queue seems not the right > thing to do at first look, and w/o any deeper analysis in the commit description. > > Could you look a bit further into the issue? Do you have a reproducer to > trigger it? So while synchronize_net() makes sure no packets can be delivered from normal packet processing (through packet hook, if driver is not horribly buggy (like delivering packets while IFF_UPP is not there...)), we still might have some TX packet in a cpu completion_queue (fed in dev_kfree_skb_irq()) This can happen if the cpu having these TX skbs had to schedule ksoftirqd under stress. RCU quiescent period is ended before ksoftirqd could perform its work. If sock_queue_err_skb() is called from __skb_complete_tx_timestamp() at the wrong time, we might get into this state. sock_queue_err_skb() might need to be more careful ?
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web