From nobody Tue Oct 7 15:54:37 2025 Received: from m16.mail.163.com (m16.mail.163.com [220.197.31.2]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E46102874F3; Wed, 9 Jul 2025 09:57:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=220.197.31.2 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752055038; cv=none; b=b2OTkFEsIPWeH5GJzJyqMvGpK37fGK/7OhJLcq8HDu31BiJz5kruz2T0Sr99BdBLHBSmuRwrKOxGD1pJXZuAR2uVkMbIFEkz0VHvyXvEEPzpx8+/6Y6ZhUB2xStkt7ADx8ePFJM4bbGL32WWnTG5cL+iESYqx2WZjaNEBDUptVU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1752055038; c=relaxed/simple; bh=H3ATC8Kv9kchxPcXEljkmXkfeaLLF1dxEOQTkpIXJRo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=WnxlAWK6da9eQ/SUvwwjscsTdClaIHjdBsFtUERBOpDG8moPmPXtBlEE5luKaZYflzX+3BtcOp2fuPoygyMqA485oKM5jrKvg6EUP0bqKk7Pg8NcAQlv96RI9hfeD8aGSBsRtBJP0fOR4WkYHHNW+M+lPBPMWnGypPCpRaIfz/4= 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=WKgHHShu; arc=none smtp.client-ip=220.197.31.2 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="WKgHHShu" 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=SL JGjCoU+vCEWt5IYZov7Eqv0Dsa9t8J9ap2ePfV8EA=; b=WKgHHShu8PkDwPRULO JYL0TA2P7pTTcYHryEghY1TLXgu8T+zI0p15u2pH9wTEdfPbkAzWHz85zMDtwQAR s3y/2ZFNKk3FTXaOvXdNyGT/eXovYf+twSVUHfuv0zxHAJdyogY43XeCecdPmwET DC+BXyfFz7wUgtcw0rC1RzjwY= Received: from kylin-ERAZER-H610M.. (unknown []) by gzsmtp1 (Coremail) with SMTP id PCgvCgBn08jlPG5oBz4hBA--.440S4; Wed, 09 Jul 2025 17:56:55 +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 v3 2/2] af_packet: fix soft lockup issue caused by tpacket_snd() Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2025 17:56:53 +0800 Message-ID: <20250709095653.62469-3-luyun_611@163.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: <20250709095653.62469-1-luyun_611@163.com> References: <20250709095653.62469-1-luyun_611@163.com> 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: PCgvCgBn08jlPG5oBz4hBA--.440S4 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1Uf129KBjvJXoWxZF1xXFy7Zr4rKw17Aw1rtFb_yoWrXrykpa yYg3sIv3WDJr1xtw4fGa1kXr12vw4rJFs8GrWvq34Sywnxt3savrWIkrWj9Fy8uFWktaya vF4qvr4UCw1DAa7anT9S1TB71UUUUU7qnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDUYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0xZFpf9x07j6q2NUUUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: pox130jbwriqqrwthudrp/1tbiQw6FzmhuNPn8YgAAsT 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, move the penging_refcnt check to the start of the do-while loop, and reuse ph to continue for the next iteration. Fixes: 89ed5b519004 ("af_packet: Block execution of tasks waiting for trans= mit to complete in AF_PACKET") Cc: stable@kernel.org Suggested-by: LongJun Tang Signed-off-by: Yun Lu Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet --- Changes in v3: - Simplify the code and reuse ph to continue. Thanks: Eric Dumazet. - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250708020642.27838-1-luyun_611@= 163.com/ Changes in v2: - Add a Fixes tag. - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250707081629.10344-1-luyun_611@= 163.com/ --- net/packet/af_packet.c | 21 ++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c index 7089b8c2a655..89a5d2a3a720 100644 --- a/net/packet/af_packet.c +++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c @@ -2846,11 +2846,21 @@ static int tpacket_snd(struct packet_sock *po, stru= ct 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) { + /* Note: packet_read_pending() might be slow if we + * have to call it as it's per_cpu variable, but in + * fast-path we don't have to call it, only when ph + * is NULL, we need to check pending_refcnt. + */ + if (need_wait && packet_read_pending(&po->tx_ring)) { timeo =3D wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(&po->skb_completio= n, timeo); if (timeo <=3D 0) { err =3D !timeo ? -ETIMEDOUT : -ERESTARTSYS; goto out_put; + } else { + /* Just reuse ph to continue for the next iteration, and + * ph will be reassigned at the start of the next iteration. + */ + ph =3D (void *)1; } } /* check for additional frames */ @@ -2943,14 +2953,7 @@ static int tpacket_snd(struct packet_sock *po, struc= t msghdr *msg) } packet_increment_head(&po->tx_ring); len_sum +=3D tp_len; - } while (likely((ph !=3D NULL) || - /* Note: packet_read_pending() might be slow if we have - * to call it as it's per_cpu variable, but in fast-path - * we already short-circuit the loop with the first - * condition, and luckily don't have to go that path - * anyway. - */ - (need_wait && packet_read_pending(&po->tx_ring)))); + } while (likely(ph !=3D NULL)) =20 err =3D len_sum; goto out_put; --=20 2.43.0