Re: Interrupt race in NET_LOCK/NET_UNLOCK
On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 11:41:00AM +0100, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 23/12/16(Fri) 06:08, Visa Hankala wrote: > > NET_LOCK() should raise IPL before acquiring the lock, and NET_UNLOCK() > > should restore the level after releasing the lock. Otherwise, lock > > recursion can occur, most likely right after the splx(). An example: > > > > nd6_slowtimo <- NET_LOCK() > > timeout_run > > softclock > > softintr_dispatch > > dosoftint > > interrupt > > k_intr > > if_netisr <- NET_LOCK() > > taskq_thread > > > > OK? > > This should never happen. Simply because the NET_LOCK() MUST NOT be > taken in (soft) interrupt context. > > The real problem is that nd6_slowtimo() is set twice, once with > timeout_set_proc(9) and once with timeout_set(9). Diff below fixes > that. > > ok? OK bluhm@ > > Index: netinet6/nd6.c > === > RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet6/nd6.c,v > retrieving revision 1.200 > diff -u -p -r1.200 nd6.c > --- netinet6/nd6.c22 Dec 2016 13:39:32 - 1.200 > +++ netinet6/nd6.c23 Dec 2016 10:37:33 - > @@ -1479,7 +1479,6 @@ nd6_slowtimo(void *ignored_arg) > > NET_LOCK(s); > > - timeout_set(&nd6_slowtimo_ch, nd6_slowtimo, NULL); > timeout_add_sec(&nd6_slowtimo_ch, ND6_SLOWTIMER_INTERVAL); > > TAILQ_FOREACH(ifp, &ifnet, if_list) {
Re: Interrupt race in NET_LOCK/NET_UNLOCK
On 23 December 2016 at 11:41, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > On 23/12/16(Fri) 06:08, Visa Hankala wrote: >> NET_LOCK() should raise IPL before acquiring the lock, and NET_UNLOCK() >> should restore the level after releasing the lock. Otherwise, lock >> recursion can occur, most likely right after the splx(). An example: >> >> nd6_slowtimo <- NET_LOCK() >> timeout_run >> softclock >> softintr_dispatch >> dosoftint >> interrupt >> k_intr >> if_netisr <- NET_LOCK() >> taskq_thread >> >> OK? > > This should never happen. Simply because the NET_LOCK() MUST NOT be > taken in (soft) interrupt context. > > The real problem is that nd6_slowtimo() is set twice, once with > timeout_set_proc(9) and once with timeout_set(9). Diff below fixes > that. > > ok? > Most definitely.
Re: Interrupt race in NET_LOCK/NET_UNLOCK
On 23/12/16(Fri) 06:08, Visa Hankala wrote: > NET_LOCK() should raise IPL before acquiring the lock, and NET_UNLOCK() > should restore the level after releasing the lock. Otherwise, lock > recursion can occur, most likely right after the splx(). An example: > > nd6_slowtimo <- NET_LOCK() > timeout_run > softclock > softintr_dispatch > dosoftint > interrupt > k_intr > if_netisr <- NET_LOCK() > taskq_thread > > OK? This should never happen. Simply because the NET_LOCK() MUST NOT be taken in (soft) interrupt context. The real problem is that nd6_slowtimo() is set twice, once with timeout_set_proc(9) and once with timeout_set(9). Diff below fixes that. ok? Index: netinet6/nd6.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet6/nd6.c,v retrieving revision 1.200 diff -u -p -r1.200 nd6.c --- netinet6/nd6.c 22 Dec 2016 13:39:32 - 1.200 +++ netinet6/nd6.c 23 Dec 2016 10:37:33 - @@ -1479,7 +1479,6 @@ nd6_slowtimo(void *ignored_arg) NET_LOCK(s); - timeout_set(&nd6_slowtimo_ch, nd6_slowtimo, NULL); timeout_add_sec(&nd6_slowtimo_ch, ND6_SLOWTIMER_INTERVAL); TAILQ_FOREACH(ifp, &ifnet, if_list) {