Re: [PATCH V1] NFS-RDMA: fix qp pointer validation checks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/9/2014 7:26 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
On Apr 9, 2014, at 7:56 PM, Devesh Sharma <Devesh.Sharma@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Chuk and Trond

I will resend a v2 for this.
What if ib_post_send() fails with immidate error, I that case also DECR_CQCOUNT() will be called but no completion will be reported. Will that not cause any problems?
We should investigate whether an error return from ib_post_{send,recv} means there will be no completion. But I’ve never seen these verbs fail in practice, so I’m not in a hurry to make work for anyone! ;-)

A synchronous failure from ib_post_* means the WR (or at least one of them if there were > 1) failed and did not get submitted to HW. So there will be no completion for those that failed.

However it seems to me the new (!ia->ri_id->qp) checks outside the connect logic are unnecessary.

Clearly, as you noticed, the ib_post_{send,recv} verbs do not check that their “qp" argument is NULL before dereferencing it.

But I don’t understand how xprtrdma can post any operation if the transport isn’t connected. In other words, how would it be possible to call rpcrdma_ep_post_recv() if the connect had failed and there was no QP?

If disconnect wipes ia->ri_id->qp while there are still operations in progress, that would be the real bug.


Also in rpcrdma_register_frmr_external() I am seeing DECT_CQCOUNT is called twice
First at line 1538 (unlikely however) and second at line 1562. Shouldn't  it be only at 1562?
if (seg1->mr_chunk.rl_mw->r.frmr.state == FRMR_IS_VALID) then rpcrdma_register_frmr_external() posts two Work Requests (LOCAL_INV then FAST_REG_MR) with one ib_post_send(). Thus it is correct to DECR_CQCOUNT twice in that case because each WR will trigger a separate completion event.


-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Lever [mailto:chuck.lever@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 1:57 AM
To: Devesh Sharma
Cc: Linux NFS Mailing List; linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Trond Myklebust
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1] NFS-RDMA: fix qp pointer validation checks


On Apr 9, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Devesh,

This looks a lot better. I still have a couple of small suggestions, though.

On Apr 9, 2014, at 14:40, Devesh Sharma <devesh.sharma@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

If the rdma_create_qp fails to create qp due to device firmware being
in invalid state xprtrdma still tries to destroy the non-existant qp
and ends up in a NULL pointer reference crash.
Adding proper checks for vaidating QP pointer avoids this to happen.

Signed-off-by: Devesh Sharma <devesh.sharma@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/verbs.c |   29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/verbs.c
b/net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/verbs.c index 9372656..902ac78 100644
--- a/net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/verbs.c
+++ b/net/sunrpc/xprtrdma/verbs.c
@@ -831,10 +831,12 @@ rpcrdma_ep_connect(struct rpcrdma_ep *ep, struct rpcrdma_ia *ia)
	if (ep->rep_connected != 0) {
		struct rpcrdma_xprt *xprt;
retry:
-		rc = rpcrdma_ep_disconnect(ep, ia);
-		if (rc && rc != -ENOTCONN)
-			dprintk("RPC:       %s: rpcrdma_ep_disconnect"
+		if (ia->ri_id->qp) {
+			rc = rpcrdma_ep_disconnect(ep, ia);
+			if (rc && rc != -ENOTCONN)
+				dprintk("RPC:       %s: rpcrdma_ep_disconnect"
				" status %i\n", __func__, rc);
+		}
		rpcrdma_clean_cq(ep->rep_cq);

		xprt = container_of(ia, struct rpcrdma_xprt, rx_ia); @@ -859,7
+861,9 @@ retry:
			goto out;
		}
		/* END TEMP */
-		rdma_destroy_qp(ia->ri_id);
+		if (ia->ri_id->qp) {
+			rdma_destroy_qp(ia->ri_id);
+		}
Nit: No need for braces here.

		rdma_destroy_id(ia->ri_id);
		ia->ri_id = id;
	}
@@ -1557,6 +1561,13 @@ rpcrdma_register_frmr_external(struct rpcrdma_mr_seg *seg,
	frmr_wr.wr.fast_reg.rkey = seg1->mr_chunk.rl_mw->r.frmr.fr_mr->rkey;
	DECR_CQCOUNT(&r_xprt->rx_ep);
I don't think you can DECR_CQCOUNT, then exit without posting the send. That will screw up the completion counter and result in a transport hang, won't it?

+	if (!ia->ri_is->qp) {
+		rc = -EINVAL;
+		while (i--)
+			rpcrdma_unmap_one(ia, --seg);
+		goto out;
+	}
Instead of duplicating the rpcrdma_unmap_one() cleanup here, why not
just do

	if (ia->ri_is->qp)
		rc = ib_post_send(...)
	else
		rc = -EINVAL;

BTW: can we not simply test for ia->ri_is->qp before we even call rpcrdma_map_one() and hence bail out before we have to do any cleanup?

+
	rc = ib_post_send(ia->ri_id->qp, post_wr, &bad_wr);

	if (rc) {
@@ -1571,6 +1582,7 @@ rpcrdma_register_frmr_external(struct rpcrdma_mr_seg *seg,
		seg1->mr_len = len;
	}
	*nsegs = i;
+out:
	return rc;
}

@@ -1592,6 +1604,9 @@ rpcrdma_deregister_frmr_external(struct rpcrdma_mr_seg *seg,
	invalidate_wr.ex.invalidate_rkey = seg1->mr_chunk.rl_mw->r.frmr.fr_mr->rkey;
	DECR_CQCOUNT(&r_xprt->rx_ep);
Ditto.

+	if (!ia->ri_id->qp)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
	rc = ib_post_send(ia->ri_id->qp, &invalidate_wr, &bad_wr);
	if (rc)
		dprintk("RPC:       %s: failed ib_post_send for invalidate,"
@@ -1923,6 +1938,9 @@ rpcrdma_ep_post(struct rpcrdma_ia *ia,
		send_wr.send_flags = IB_SEND_SIGNALED;
	}
Ditto.

+	if (!ia->ri_id->qp)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
	rc = ib_post_send(ia->ri_id->qp, &send_wr, &send_wr_fail);
	if (rc)
		dprintk("RPC:       %s: ib_post_send returned %i\n", __func__,
@@ -1951,6 +1969,9 @@ rpcrdma_ep_post_recv(struct rpcrdma_ia *ia,
		rep->rr_iov.addr, rep->rr_iov.length, DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);

	DECR_CQCOUNT(ep);
And here.

+
+	if (!ia->ri_id->qp)
+		return -EINVAL;
	rc = ib_post_recv(ia->ri_id->qp, &recv_wr, &recv_wr_fail);

	if (rc)
--
1.7.1

_________________________________
Trond Myklebust
Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData
trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs"
in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo
info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
Chuck Lever
chuck[dot]lever[at]oracle[dot]com



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystem Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Linux Media Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Info]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux