lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Jul]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/1 v2] skbuff: Fix a potential race while recycling page_pool packets
From
Date
On 2021/7/15 23:02, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 07:57:57AM -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 15, 2021 at 7:45 AM Ilias Apalodimas
>> <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> atomic_sub_return(skb->nohdr ? (1 << SKB_DATAREF_SHIFT) + 1 : 1,
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>> &shinfo->dataref))
>>>>>> - return;
>>>>>> + goto exit;
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it possible this patch may break the head frag page for the original skb,
>>>>> supposing it's head frag page is from the page pool and below change clears
>>>>> the pp_recycle for original skb, causing a page leaking for the page pool?
>>>>
>>>> I don't see how. The assumption here is that when atomic_sub_return
>>>> gets down to 0 we will still have an skb with skb->pp_recycle set and
>>>> it will flow down and encounter skb_free_head below. All we are doing
>>>> is skipping those steps and clearing skb->pp_recycle for all but the
>>>> last buffer and the last one to free it will trigger the recycling.
>>>
>>> I think the assumption here is that
>>> 1. We clone an skb
>>> 2. The original skb goes into pskb_expand_head()
>>> 3. skb_release_data() will be called for the original skb
>>>
>>> But with the dataref bumped, we'll skip the recycling for it but we'll also
>>> skip recycling or unmapping the current head (which is a page_pool mapped
>>> buffer)
>>
>> Right, but in that case it is the clone that is left holding the
>> original head and the skb->pp_recycle flag is set on the clone as it
>> was copied from the original when we cloned it.
>
> Ah yes, that's what I missed
>
>> What we have
>> essentially done is transferred the responsibility for freeing it from
>> the original to the clone.
>>
>> If you think about it the result is the same as if step 2 was to go
>> into kfree_skb. We would still be calling skb_release_data and the
>> dataref would be decremented without the original freeing the page. We
>> have to wait until all the clones are freed and dataref reaches 0
>> before the head can be recycled.
>
> Yep sounds correct

Ok, I suppose the fraglist skb is handled similar as the regular skb, right?

Also, this patch might need respinning as the state of this patch is "Changes
Requested" in patchwork.

>
> Thanks
> /Ilias
> .
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-07-16 04:31    [W:1.288 / U:0.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site