Hi Niels,
I did consider this function however I guess it is safe to use
tipc_node_read_lock()/unlock() since this value is being apply in this callback
function.
BTW, you must be using tipc_node_write_unlock_fast() instead of
tipc_node_write_unlock().
Regards,
Hoang
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Niels Dossche <dossche.ni...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2022 11:12 PM
> To: tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
> Cc: net...@vger.kernel.org; Jon Maloy <jma...@redhat.com>; Ying Xue
> <ying....@windriver.com>; David S. Miller
> <da...@davemloft.net>; Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org>; Paolo Abeni
> <pab...@redhat.com>; Hoang Huu Le
> <hoang.h...@dektech.com.au>; Niels Dossche <dossche.ni...@gmail.com>
> Subject: [PATCH net] tipc: use a write lock for keepalive_intv instead of a
> read lock
>
> Currently, n->keepalive_intv is written to while n is locked by a read
> lock instead of a write lock. This seems to me to break the atomicity
> against other readers.
> Change this to a write lock instead to solve the issue.
>
> Note:
> I am currently working on a static analyser to detect missing locks
> using type-based static analysis as my master's thesis
> in order to obtain my master's degree.
> If you would like to have more details, please let me know.
> This was a reported case. I manually verified the report by looking
> at the code, so that I do not send wrong information or patches.
> After concluding that this seems to be a true positive, I created
> this patch. I have both compile-tested this patch and runtime-tested
> this patch on x86_64. The effect on a running system could be a
> potential race condition in exceptional cases.
> This issue was found on Linux v5.17.
>
> Fixes: f5d6c3e5a359 ("tipc: fix node keep alive interval calculation")
> Signed-off-by: Niels Dossche <dossche.ni...@gmail.com>
> ---
> net/tipc/node.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/tipc/node.c b/net/tipc/node.c
> index 6ef95ce565bd..da867ddb93f5 100644
> --- a/net/tipc/node.c
> +++ b/net/tipc/node.c
> @@ -806,9 +806,9 @@ static void tipc_node_timeout(struct timer_list *t)
> /* Initial node interval to value larger (10 seconds), then it will be
> * recalculated with link lowest tolerance
> */
> - tipc_node_read_lock(n);
> + tipc_node_write_lock(n);
> n->keepalive_intv = 10000;
> - tipc_node_read_unlock(n);
> + tipc_node_write_unlock(n);
> for (bearer_id = 0; remains && (bearer_id < MAX_BEARERS); bearer_id++) {
> tipc_node_read_lock(n);
> le = &n->links[bearer_id];
> --
> 2.35.1
_______________________________________________
tipc-discussion mailing list
tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tipc-discussion
