diff options
author | Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> | 2022-04-04 11:38:47 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> | 2022-04-05 14:28:16 -0700 |
commit | 0b5c21bbc01e92745ca1ca4f6fd87d878fa3ea5e (patch) | |
tree | 19ea9604000ede608a0b28759213424cd3fc4cbb /net/core/rtnetlink.c | |
parent | 6f2f36e5f932c58e370bff79aba7f05963ea1c2a (diff) |
net: ensure net_todo_list is processed quickly
In [1], Will raised a potential issue that the cfg80211 code,
which does (from a locking perspective)
rtnl_lock()
wiphy_lock()
rtnl_unlock()
might be suspectible to ABBA deadlocks, because rtnl_unlock()
calls netdev_run_todo(), which might end up calling rtnl_lock()
again, which could then deadlock (see the comment in the code
added here for the scenario).
Some back and forth and thinking ensued, but clearly this can't
happen if the net_todo_list is empty at the rtnl_unlock() here.
Clearly, the code here cannot actually put an entry on it, and
all other users of rtnl_unlock() will empty it since that will
always go through netdev_run_todo(), emptying the list.
So the only other way to get there would be to add to the list
and then unlock the RTNL without going through rtnl_unlock(),
which is only possible through __rtnl_unlock(). However, this
isn't exported and not used in many places, and none of them
seem to be able to unregister before using it.
Therefore, add a WARN_ON() in the code to ensure this invariant
won't be broken, so that the cfg80211 (or any similar) code
stays safe.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/Yjzpo3TfZxtKPMAG@google.com
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220404113847.0ee02e4a70da.Ic73d206e217db20fd22dcec14fe5442ca732804b@changeid
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'net/core/rtnetlink.c')
-rw-r--r-- | net/core/rtnetlink.c | 33 |
1 files changed, 33 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/net/core/rtnetlink.c b/net/core/rtnetlink.c index 159c9c61e6af..0e4502d641eb 100644 --- a/net/core/rtnetlink.c +++ b/net/core/rtnetlink.c @@ -95,6 +95,39 @@ void __rtnl_unlock(void) defer_kfree_skb_list = NULL; + /* Ensure that we didn't actually add any TODO item when __rtnl_unlock() + * is used. In some places, e.g. in cfg80211, we have code that will do + * something like + * rtnl_lock() + * wiphy_lock() + * ... + * rtnl_unlock() + * + * and because netdev_run_todo() acquires the RTNL for items on the list + * we could cause a situation such as this: + * Thread 1 Thread 2 + * rtnl_lock() + * unregister_netdevice() + * __rtnl_unlock() + * rtnl_lock() + * wiphy_lock() + * rtnl_unlock() + * netdev_run_todo() + * __rtnl_unlock() + * + * // list not empty now + * // because of thread 2 + * rtnl_lock() + * while (!list_empty(...)) + * rtnl_lock() + * wiphy_lock() + * **** DEADLOCK **** + * + * However, usage of __rtnl_unlock() is rare, and so we can ensure that + * it's not used in cases where something is added to do the list. + */ + WARN_ON(!list_empty(&net_todo_list)); + mutex_unlock(&rtnl_mutex); while (head) { |