Re: [PATCH v4 net] tcp: avoid the lookup process failing to get sk in ehash table

From: Jason Xing
Date: Mon Jan 16 2023 - 05:25:31 EST


On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 5:54 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 16, 2023 at 8:38 AM Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > While one cpu is working on looking up the right socket from ehash
> > table, another cpu is done deleting the request socket and is about
> > to add (or is adding) the big socket from the table. It means that
> > we could miss both of them, even though it has little chance.
> >
> >
> > Fixes: 5e0724d027f0 ("tcp/dccp: fix hashdance race for passive sessions")
> > Suggested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelxing@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230112065336.41034-1-kerneljasonxing@xxxxxxxxx/
> > ---
> > v4:
> > 1) adjust the code style and make it easier to read.
> >
> > v3:
> > 1) get rid of else-if statement.
> >
> > v2:
> > 1) adding the sk node into the tail of list to prevent the race.
> > 2) fix the race condition when handling time-wait socket hashdance.
> > ---
> > net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++--
> > net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c | 6 +++---
> > 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> > index 24a38b56fab9..c64eec874b31 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> > @@ -650,8 +650,21 @@ bool inet_ehash_insert(struct sock *sk, struct sock *osk, bool *found_dup_sk)
> > spin_lock(lock);
> > if (osk) {
> > WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_hash != osk->sk_hash);
> > - ret = sk_nulls_del_node_init_rcu(osk);
> > - } else if (found_dup_sk) {
> > + if (sk_hashed(osk)) {
> > + /* Before deleting the node, we insert a new one to make
> > + * sure that the look-up-sk process would not miss either
> > + * of them and that at least one node would exist in ehash
> > + * table all the time. Otherwise there's a tiny chance
> > + * that lookup process could find nothing in ehash table.
> > + */
> > + __sk_nulls_add_node_tail_rcu(sk, list);
> > + sk_nulls_del_node_init_rcu(osk);
> > + } else {
> > + ret = false;
>
>
> Well, you added another 'else' statement...
>

Yeah, I want to make the code look more concise and easy to read. I
alway felt the previous series of commits are not human-readable
though it could work.

> What about the following ?
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> index 24a38b56fab9e9d7d893e23b30d26e275359ec70..1bcf5ce8dd1317b2144bcb47a2ad238532b9accf
> 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> @@ -650,8 +650,14 @@ bool inet_ehash_insert(struct sock *sk, struct
> sock *osk, bool *found_dup_sk)
> spin_lock(lock);
> if (osk) {
> WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_hash != osk->sk_hash);
> - ret = sk_nulls_del_node_init_rcu(osk);
> - } else if (found_dup_sk) {
> + ret = sk_hashed(osk);
> + if (ret) {
> + __sk_nulls_add_node_tail_rcu(sk, list);
> + sk_nulls_del_node_init_rcu(osk);
> + }

Ah, I prefer this one :)

Thanks,
Jason

> + goto unlock;
> + }
> + if (found_dup_sk) {
> *found_dup_sk = inet_ehash_lookup_by_sk(sk, list);
> if (*found_dup_sk)
> ret = false;
> @@ -659,7 +665,7 @@ bool inet_ehash_insert(struct sock *sk, struct
> sock *osk, bool *found_dup_sk)
>
> if (ret)
> __sk_nulls_add_node_rcu(sk, list);
> -
> +unlock:
> spin_unlock(lock);
>
> return ret;