On Fri, 2018-01-12 at 11:53 -0800, Saeed Mahameed wrote:
>
> On 01/12/2018 08:46 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-01-12 at 09:32 -0700, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 11:42:22AM +0800, Jianchao Wang wrote:
> > > > Customer reported memory corruption issue on previous mlx4_en driver
> > > > version where the order-3 pages and multiple page reference counting
> > > > were still used.
> > > >
> > > > Finally, find out one of the root causes is that the HW may see stale
> > > > rx_descs due to prod db updating reaches HW before rx_desc. Especially
> > > > when cross order-3 pages boundary and update a new one, HW may write
> > > > on the pages which may has been freed and allocated again by others.
> > > >
> > > > To fix it, add a wmb between rx_desc and prod db updating to ensure
> > > > the order. Even thougth order-0 and page recycling has been introduced,
> > > > the disorder between rx_desc and prod db still could lead to corruption
> > > > on different inbound packages.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jianchao Wang <jianchao.w.wang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c | 2 +-
> > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
> > > > index 85e28ef..eefa82c 100644
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
> > > > @@ -555,7 +555,7 @@ static void mlx4_en_refill_rx_buffers(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
> > > > break;
> > > > ring->prod++;
> > > > } while (likely(--missing));
> > > > -
> > > > + wmb(); /* ensure rx_desc updating reaches HW before prod db updating */
> > > > mlx4_en_update_rx_prod_db(ring);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > >
> > > Does this need to be dma_wmb(), and should it be in
> > > mlx4_en_update_rx_prod_db ?
> > >
> >
> > +1 on dma_wmb()
> >
> > On what architecture bug was observed ?
> >
> > In any case, the barrier should be moved in mlx4_en_update_rx_prod_db()
> > I think.
> >
>
> +1 on dma_wmb(), thanks Eric for reviewing this.
>
> The barrier is also needed elsewhere in the code as well, but I wouldn't
> put it in mlx4_en_update_rx_prod_db(), just to allow batch filling of
> all rx rings and then hit the barrier only once. As a rule of thumb, mem
> barriers are the ring API caller responsibility.
>
> e.g. in mlx4_en_activate_rx_rings():
> between mlx4_en_fill_rx_buffers(priv); and the loop that updates rx prod
> for all rings ring, the dma_wmb is needed, see below.
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
> index b4d144e67514..65541721a240 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
> @@ -370,6 +370,8 @@ int mlx4_en_activate_rx_rings(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv)
> if (err)
> goto err_buffers;
>
> + dma_wmb();
> +
> for (ring_ind = 0; ring_ind < priv->rx_ring_num; ring_ind++) {
> ring = priv->rx_ring[ring_ind];
Why bother, considering dma_wmb() is a nop on x86,
simply a compiler barrier.
Putting it in mlx4_en_update_rx_prod_db() and have no obscure bugs...
Also we might change the existing wmb() in mlx4_en_process_rx_cq() by
dma_wmb(), that would help performance a bit.
--
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
