Re: [PATCH net 2/2] virtio_net: fix missing lock protection on control_buf access

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

 



On Tue, 28 May 2024 12:45:32 -0400, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 12:01:45AM +0800, Heng Qi wrote:
> > On Tue, 28 May 2024 11:46:28 -0400, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 03:52:26PM +0800, Heng Qi wrote:
> > > > Refactored the handling of control_buf to be within the cvq_lock
> > > > critical section, mitigating race conditions between reading device
> > > > responses and new command submissions.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: 6f45ab3e0409 ("virtio_net: Add a lock for the command VQ.")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Heng Qi <hengqi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I don't get what does this change. status can change immediately
> > > after you drop the mutex, can it not? what exactly is the
> > > race conditions you are worried about?
> > 
> > See the following case:
> > 
> > 1. Command A is acknowledged and successfully executed by the device.
> > 2. After releasing the mutex (mutex_unlock), process P1 gets preempted before
> >    it can read vi->ctrl->status, *which should be VIRTIO_NET_OK*.
> > 3. A new command B (like the DIM command) is issued.
> > 4. Post vi->ctrl->status being set to VIRTIO_NET_ERR by
> >    virtnet_send_command_reply(), process P2 gets preempted.
> > 5. Process P1 resumes, reads *vi->ctrl->status as VIRTIO_NET_ERR*, and reports
> >    this error back for Command A. <-- Race causes incorrect results to be read.
> > 
> > Thanks.
> 
> 
> Why is it important that P1 gets VIRTIO_NET_OK?
> After all it is no longer the state.

The driver needs to know whether the command actually executed success.

Thanks.

> 
> > > 
> > > > ---
> > > >  drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 4 +++-
> > > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > > > index 6b0512a628e0..3d8407d9e3d2 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > > > @@ -2686,6 +2686,7 @@ static bool virtnet_send_command_reply(struct virtnet_info *vi, u8 class, u8 cmd
> > > >  {
> > > >  	struct scatterlist *sgs[5], hdr, stat;
> > > >  	u32 out_num = 0, tmp, in_num = 0;
> > > > +	bool ret;
> > > >  	int err;
> > > >  
> > > >  	/* Caller should know better */
> > > > @@ -2731,8 +2732,9 @@ static bool virtnet_send_command_reply(struct virtnet_info *vi, u8 class, u8 cmd
> > > >  	}
> > > >  
> > > >  unlock:
> > > > +	ret = vi->ctrl->status == VIRTIO_NET_OK;
> > > >  	mutex_unlock(&vi->cvq_lock);
> > > > -	return vi->ctrl->status == VIRTIO_NET_OK;
> > > > +	return ret;
> > > >  }
> > > >  
> > > >  static bool virtnet_send_command(struct virtnet_info *vi, u8 class, u8 cmd,
> > > > -- 
> > > > 2.32.0.3.g01195cf9f
> > > 
> 




[Index of Archives]     [KVM Development]     [Libvirt Development]     [Libvirt Users]     [CentOS Virtualization]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux