On 06/06/2024 13:13, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
On 02/06/2024 16:08, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
On 02/06/2024 14:43, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
Hi Sagi,
On 02/06/2024 11:53, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
On 02/06/2024 11:19, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
On Sun, May 26, 2024 at 11:31:25AM +0300, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
ib_drain_qp does not do drain a shared recv queue (because it is
shared). However in the absence of any guarantees that the recv
completions were consumed, the ulp can reference these completions
after draining the qp and freeing its associated resources, which
is a uaf [1].
We cannot drain a srq like a normal rq, however in ib_drain_qp
once the qp moved to error state, we reap the recv_cq once in
order to prevent consumption of recv completions after the drain.
[1]:
--
[199856.569999] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual
address 002248778adfd6d0
<....>
[199856.721701] Workqueue: ib-comp-wq ib_cq_poll_work [ib_core]
<....>
[199856.827281] Call trace:
[199856.829847] nvmet_parse_admin_cmd+0x34/0x178 [nvmet]
[199856.835007] nvmet_req_init+0x2e0/0x378 [nvmet]
[199856.839640] nvmet_rdma_handle_command+0xa4/0x2e8 [nvmet_rdma]
[199856.845575] nvmet_rdma_recv_done+0xcc/0x240 [nvmet_rdma]
[199856.851109] __ib_process_cq+0x84/0xf0 [ib_core]
[199856.855858] ib_cq_poll_work+0x34/0xa0 [ib_core]
[199856.860587] process_one_work+0x1ec/0x4a0
[199856.864694] worker_thread+0x48/0x490
[199856.868453] kthread+0x158/0x160
[199856.871779] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
--
Signed-off-by: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Note this patch is not yet tested, but sending it for visibility and
early feedback. While nothing prevents ib_drain_cq to process a cq
directly (even if it has another context) I am not convinced if all
the upper layers don't have any assumptions about a single context
consuming the cq, even if it is while it is drained. It is also
possible to to add ib_reap_cq that fences the cq poll context before
reaping the cq, but this may have other side-effects.
Did you have a chance to test this patch?
I looked at the code and it seems to be correct change, but I also
don't
know about all ULP assumptions.
Not yet...
One thing that is problematic with this patch though is that there
is no
stopping condition to the direct poll. So if the CQ is shared among
a number of
qps (and srq's), nothing prevents the polling from consume
completions forever...
So we probably need it to be:
--
diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c
b/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c
index 580e9019e96a..f411fef35938 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/verbs.c
@@ -2971,7 +2971,7 @@ void ib_drain_qp(struct ib_qp *qp)
* guarantees that the ulp will free resources and
only then
* consume the recv completion.
*/
- ib_process_cq_direct(qp->recv_cq, -1);
+ ib_process_cq_direct(qp->recv_cq, qp->recv_cq->cqe);
I tried to fix the problem few years ago in [1] but eventually the
patchset was not accepted.
We should probably try to improve the original series (using cq->cqe
instead of -1 for example) and upstream it.
[1]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/1516197178-26493-1-git-send-email-maxg@xxxxxxxxxxxx/
Yes. I'd like to know if the qp event is needed though, given that
the qp is already in error state (from the sq drain)
and then we run a single pass over the recv_cq, is it possible to
miss any completions.
Would like to resolve the drain without involving the ulp drivers.
If so, then perhaps we can intercept the qp event at the core, before
sending it to the ulp and there we can complete
the srq completion.
Ping?
I think that catching the IB_EVENT_QP_LAST_WQE_REACHED in the core and
complete(&qp->srq_completion) is possible but will require some event
processing in the ib core.
Probably my patch [1/4] from
https://lore.kernel.org/all/1516197178-26493-2-git-send-email-maxg@xxxxxxxxxxxx/#r
should be updated with this logic.
