lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: netfilter: nf_conntrack: there maybe a bug in __nf_conntrack_confirm, when it race against get_next_corpse
On Tue, 4 Nov 2014 09:48:32 +0800
"billbonaparte" <programme110@gmail.com> wrote:

> (sorry to send this e-mail again, last mail is rejected by server due to
> non-acceptable content)

There is several issues with your submission. I'll take care of
resubmitting a patch in your name (so you will get credit in the git
log).

If you care to know, issues are:
1. you are not sending to the appropriate mailing lists,
2. patch is as an attachment (should be inlined),
3. the patch have style and white-space issues.


> Florian Westphal [mailto:fw@strlen.de] wrote:
> >Correct. This is broken since the central spin lock removal, since
> >nf_conntrack_lock no longer protects both get_next_corpse and
> >conntrack_confirm.
> >
> >Please send a patch, moving dying check after removal of conntrack from
> >the percpu list,
>
> Since unconfirmed conntrack is stored in unconfirmed-list which is per-cpu
> list and protected by per-cpu spin-lock, we can remove it from
> uncomfirmed-list and insert it into ct-hash-table separately. that is to
> say, we can remove it from uncomfirmed-list without holding corresponding
> hash-lock, then check if it is dying.
> if it is dying, we add it to the dying-list, then quit
> __nf_conntrack_confirm. we do this to follow the rules that the conntrack
> must alternatively at unconfirmed-list or dying-list when it is abort to be
> destroyed.

In the resubmit. I'll take a slightly more conservative approach, by
keeping the DYING check under the hash-lock, as it is currently. I
guess we could do it without holding the hash-lock, but I want to keep
the fix as simple as possible.


> >> 2. operation on ct->status should be atomic, because it race aginst
> >> get_next_corpse.
[...]
> if there is a race at operating ct->status, there will be in alternative
> case:
> 1) IPS_DYING bit which set in get_next_corpse override other bits (e.g.
> IPS_SRC_NAT_DONE_BIT), or
> 2) other bits (e.g. IPS_SRC_NAT_DONE_BIT) which set in nf_nat_setup_info
> override IPS_DYING bit.

Notice the set_bit() is atomic, so we don't have these issues (of bits
getting overridden).

--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat
Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-06 14:21    [W:0.080 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site