From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: v.narang@samsung.com, Maninder Singh <maninder1.s@samsung.com>
Cc: "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"willemb@google.com" <willemb@google.com>,
"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
"eyal.birger@gmail.com" <eyal.birger@gmail.com>,
"tklauser@distanz.ch" <tklauser@distanz.ch>,
"fruggeri@aristanetworks.com" <fruggeri@aristanetworks.com>,
"dwmw2@infradead.org" <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
PANKAJ MISHRA <pankaj.m@samsung.com>,
Geon-ho Kim <gh007.kim@samsung.com>,
Hak-Bong Lee <hakbong5.lee@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] af_packet: Raw socket destruction warning fix
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 12:08:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <569CC7BC.9090606@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1385051583.176751453111860930.JavaMail.weblogic@ep2mlwas01a>
On 01/18/2016 11:11 AM, Vaneet Narang wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> __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?
>
> It is Suspend Resume scenario and in this case close(sock_id) is
> not called and hence packet_release is also not called.
> In case of suspend, driver power down its ethernet port and release all the
> sk_buff stored in RX and TX ring. driver calls dev_kfree_skb_any to release all
> the sk_buff in tx ring and if last tx buff of socket is called then
> packet_sock_destruct() will be invoked and will result in warning if and recevive sk_buff is
> still in receive queue.
Hmm, not quite. See 2b85a34e911b ("net: No more expensive sock_hold()/sock_put()
on each tx") on how it is supposed to work.
See packet_create(): sk_alloc() inits sk_wmem_alloc to 1, sock_init_data() sets
sk_refcnt to 1. sock_hold()/__sock_put() pair in packet sock is managed when we
register/unregister proto hooks.
The other sock_put() in packet_release() to drop the final ref and call into
sk_free(), which drops the 1 ref on the sk_wmem_alloc from init time. Since you
got into __sk_free() via sock_wfree() destructor, your socket must have invoked
packet_release() prior to this (perhaps kernel destroying the process).
What kernel do you use?
> Driver calls dev_kfree_skb_any->dev_kfree_skb_irq
> and it adds buffer in completion queue to free and raises softirq NET_TX_SOFTIRQ
>
> net_tx_action->__kfree_skb->skb_release_all->skb_release_head_state->sock_wfree->
> __sk_free->packet_sock_destruct
>
> Also purging of receive queue has been taken care in other protocols.
> // IP protocol
> void inet_sock_destruct(struct sock *sk)
> {
> struct inet_sock *inet = inet_sk(sk);
>
> __skb_queue_purge(&sk->sk_receive_queue); // Purge Receive queue
> __skb_queue_purge(&sk->sk_error_queue);
>
> ....
>
> WARN_ON(atomic_read(&sk->sk_rmem_alloc));
> WARN_ON(atomic_read(&sk->sk_wmem_alloc));
> }
>
> So i think it should be done in Raw sockets also.
>
>>> ---
>>> net/packet/af_packet.c | 1 +
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c
>>> index 81b4b81..bcb37ba 100644
>
> Thanks
> Vaneet Narang
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-18 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-18 10:11 [PATCH] af_packet: Raw socket destruction warning fix Vaneet Narang
2016-01-18 11:08 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-02-10 12:43 Vaneet Narang
2016-02-10 14:56 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-02-05 5:23 Vaneet Narang
2016-01-21 11:40 Maninder Singh
2016-01-26 0:13 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-01-18 6:37 Maninder Singh
2016-01-18 9:44 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-01-18 10:29 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-02-05 11:26 ` Eric Dumazet
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=569CC7BC.9090606@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eyal.birger@gmail.com \
--cc=fruggeri@aristanetworks.com \
--cc=gh007.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=hakbong5.lee@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maninder1.s@samsung.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pankaj.m@samsung.com \
--cc=tklauser@distanz.ch \
--cc=v.narang@samsung.com \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).