W dniu 2017-09-21 o 13:12, Paweł Staszewski pisze:
W dniu 2017-09-21 o 13:03, Eric Dumazet pisze:
On Thu, 2017-09-21 at 11:06 +0200, Paweł Staszewski wrote:
W dniu 2017-09-21 o 03:17, Eric Dumazet pisze:
On Wed, 2017-09-20 at 18:09 -0700, Wei Wang wrote:
Thanks very much Pawel for the feedback.
I was looking into the code (specifically IPv4 part) and found
that in
free_fib_info_rcu(), we call free_nh_exceptions() without holding
the
fnhe_lock. I am wondering if that could cause some race condition on
fnhe->fnhe_rth_input/output so a double call on dst_dev_put() on the
same dst could be happening.
But as we call free_fib_info_rcu() only after the grace period, and
the lookup code which could potentially modify
fnhe->fnhe_rth_input/output all holds rcu_read_lock(), it seems
fine...
Hi Pawel,
Could you try the following debug patch on top of net-next branch and
reproduce the issue check if there are warning msg showing?
diff --git a/include/net/dst.h b/include/net/dst.h
index 93568bd0a352..82aff41c6f63 100644
--- a/include/net/dst.h
+++ b/include/net/dst.h
@@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static inline void dst_use_noref(struct dst_entry
*dst, unsigned long time)
static inline struct dst_entry *dst_clone(struct dst_entry *dst)
{
if (dst)
- atomic_inc(&dst->__refcnt);
+ dst_hold(dst);
return dst;
}
Thanks.
Wei
Yes, we believe skb_dst_force() and skb_dst_force_safe() should be
unified (to the 'safe' version)
We no longer have gc to protect from 0 -> 1 transition of dst
refcount.
After adding patch from Wei
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=197005#c14
OK we have two problems here
1) We need to unify skb_dst_force() ( for net tree )
2) Vlan devices should try to correctly handle IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE from
lower device. This will considerably help your performance.
For 1), this is what I had in mind, can you try it ?
Thanks a lot !
diff --git a/include/net/dst.h b/include/net/dst.h
index
93568bd0a3520bb7402f04d90cf04ac99c81cfbe..f23851eeaad917e8dafc06b58d23a2575405c894
100644
--- a/include/net/dst.h
+++ b/include/net/dst.h
@@ -271,7 +271,7 @@ static inline void dst_use_noref(struct dst_entry
*dst, unsigned long time)
static inline struct dst_entry *dst_clone(struct dst_entry *dst)
{
if (dst)
- atomic_inc(&dst->__refcnt);
+ dst_hold(dst);
return dst;
}
@@ -311,21 +311,6 @@ static inline void skb_dst_copy(struct sk_buff
*nskb, const struct sk_buff *oskb
__skb_dst_copy(nskb, oskb->_skb_refdst);
}
-/**
- * skb_dst_force - makes sure skb dst is refcounted
- * @skb: buffer
- *
- * If dst is not yet refcounted, let's do it
- */
-static inline void skb_dst_force(struct sk_buff *skb)
-{
- if (skb_dst_is_noref(skb)) {
- WARN_ON(!rcu_read_lock_held());
- skb->_skb_refdst &= ~SKB_DST_NOREF;
- dst_clone(skb_dst(skb));
- }
-}
-
/**
* dst_hold_safe - Take a reference on a dst if possible
* @dst: pointer to dst entry
@@ -356,6 +341,23 @@ static inline void skb_dst_force_safe(struct
sk_buff *skb)
}
}
+/**
+ * skb_dst_force - makes sure skb dst is refcounted
+ * @skb: buffer
+ *
+ * If dst is not yet refcounted, let's do it
+ */
+static inline void skb_dst_force(struct sk_buff *skb)
+{
+ if (skb_dst_is_noref(skb)) {
+ struct dst_entry *dst = skb_dst(skb);
+
+ WARN_ON(!rcu_read_lock_held());
+ if (!dst_hold_safe(dst))
+ dst = NULL;
+ skb->_skb_refdst = (unsigned long)dst;
+ }
+}
/**
* __skb_tunnel_rx - prepare skb for rx reinsert
Thanks
What is weird i have this part in my net-next from git:
/**
* skb_dst_force_safe - makes sure skb dst is refcounted
* @skb: buffer
*
* If dst is not yet refcounted and not destroyed, grab a ref on it.
*/
static inline void skb_dst_force_safe(struct sk_buff *skb)
{
if (skb_dst_is_noref(skb)) {
struct dst_entry *dst = skb_dst(skb);
if (!dst_hold_safe(dst))
dst = NULL;
skb->_skb_refdst = (unsigned long)dst;
}
}
ok the difference is skb_dst_force_safe not skb_dst_force
