From nobody Tue Oct 7 20:01:39 2025 Received: from m16.mail.163.com (m16.mail.163.com [220.197.31.4]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4E7678F2F; Mon, 7 Jul 2025 08:17:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=220.197.31.4 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751876228; cv=none; b=hvTCnDv8loHM+GdyF/9kzxX6m997JNJb2GjsBn+ZcMw5UpqtPwGaKbay95jCLXewNHzy/pj4a5ATXi6QoxMM8RxjzftMuBkKX4u3QS0qLF/TpAOExKfQwTEN6zvQRGv3OzR1b/bj50+60piPU2H7XhTSqUuWb+rj05UyRs63NTM= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751876228; c=relaxed/simple; bh=hXYSUPUhxwQkI0ghWfpB9b0o7xHhRFwbR0/1sggNjcY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=l6qwLi53Uw3k0tTtlVq8JoGBpYoQqZb1j7RiwZcb6xcSJuUWcmPjaXoNuAFNjyr7/MF3Qu5QjLMPkBQkej6oIK+7oiitbMbhkuk+6eiIQ4OG9h7Aya1sWvAGp5s5G2z0thTFBRfAUV2pZnNiUa4BThAg5gfg8PjCInXt77Q9JxE= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=163.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=163.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=163.com header.i=@163.com header.b=ciEutT78; arc=none smtp.client-ip=220.197.31.4 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=163.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=163.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=163.com header.i=@163.com header.b="ciEutT78" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=163.com; s=s110527; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; bh=oV VnIcFqb7r6hIKCk7DeBtS2P/QrPbBx6XW+kGwHsTQ=; b=ciEutT78+PNPW0Utlz rq3X2Uhp8qTR1w+ODYu2kc2555HdlNnHOodPpcWkMoOcDsdi34r9pzbIWmS5wJbV OpcWlzvLddP6syxk8ZbwHwZGtaT0Luwo5iMZLvozUWy2YHl25tDLjQwL4yRgJX9W JSb6wE0MBW5SdgY7FV8xngJ/c= Received: from kylin-ERAZER-H610M.. (unknown []) by gzga-smtp-mtada-g0-4 (Coremail) with SMTP id _____wDnN4ZegmtoC+yoDA--.13373S2; Mon, 07 Jul 2025 16:16:31 +0800 (CST) From: Yun Lu To: willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH] af_packet: fix soft lockup issue caused by tpacket_snd() Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2025 16:16:29 +0800 Message-ID: <20250707081629.10344-1-luyun_611@163.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-CM-TRANSID: _____wDnN4ZegmtoC+yoDA--.13373S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uf129KBjvJXoW7tr15CryUJr4kAFWDury5CFg_yoW5Jryxpa y5K342y3WDJr1Iqw18JFs5Jr12vws5JFs8GrWkX34Sywnxtas3tFWIkayjvFyUuFWvy3W3 ZF4qvr4UZ34DAaDanT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDUYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07joFALUUUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: pox130jbwriqqrwthudrp/1tbiOh6Dzmhrf6RpFgAAsO Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" From: Yun Lu When MSG_DONTWAIT is not set, the tpacket_snd operation will wait for pending_refcnt to decrement to zero before returning. The pending_refcnt is decremented by 1 when the skb->destructor function is called, indicating that the skb has been successfully sent and needs to be destroyed. If an error occurs during this process, the tpacket_snd() function will exit and return error, but pending_refcnt may not yet have decremented to zero. Assuming the next send operation is executed immediately, but there are no available frames to be sent in tx_ring (i.e., packet_current_frame returns NULL), and skb is also NULL, the function will not execute wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout() to yield the CPU. Instead, it will enter a do-while loop, waiting for pending_refcnt to be zero. Even if the previous skb has completed transmission, the skb->destructor function can only be invoked in the ksoftirqd thread (assuming NAPI threading is enabled). When both the ksoftirqd thread and the tpacket_snd operation happen to run on the same CPU, and the CPU trapped in the do-while loop without yielding, the ksoftirqd thread will not get scheduled to run. As a result, pending_refcnt will never be reduced to zero, and the do-while loop cannot exit, eventually leading to a CPU soft lockup issue. In fact, as long as pending_refcnt is not zero, even if skb is NULL, wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout() should be executed to yield the CPU, allowing the ksoftirqd thread to be scheduled. Therefore, the execution condition of this function should be modified to check if pending_refcnt is not zero. Signed-off-by: Yun Lu --- net/packet/af_packet.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c index 3d43f3eae759..7df96311adb8 100644 --- a/net/packet/af_packet.c +++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c @@ -2845,7 +2845,7 @@ static int tpacket_snd(struct packet_sock *po, struct= msghdr *msg) ph =3D packet_current_frame(po, &po->tx_ring, TP_STATUS_SEND_REQUEST); if (unlikely(ph =3D=3D NULL)) { - if (need_wait && skb) { + if (need_wait && packet_read_pending(&po->tx_ring)) { timeo =3D sock_sndtimeo(&po->sk, msg->msg_flags & MSG_DONTWAIT); timeo =3D wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(&po->skb_completio= n, timeo); if (timeo <=3D 0) { --=20 2.43.0