From: <Parthiban.Veerasooran@microchip.com>
To: <dheeraj.linuxdev@gmail.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
<edumazet@google.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>, <pabeni@redhat.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: ethernet: oa_tc6: fix race condition on ongoing_tx_skb
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2024 12:06:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <925aa1c5-f4a2-4042-92da-7cee6cb8b3d0@microchip.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241219065926.1051732-1-dheeraj.linuxdev@gmail.com>
Hi,
On 19/12/24 12:29 pm, Dheeraj Reddy Jonnalagadda wrote:
> [You don't often get email from dheeraj.linuxdev@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
>
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>
> A race condition exists in function oa_tc6_prepare_spi_tx_buf_for_tx_skbs
> due to an unsynchronized access to shared variable tc6->ongoing_tx_skb.
>
> The issue arises because the condition (!tc6->ongoing_tx_skb) is checked
> outside the critical section. Two or more threads can simultaneously
> evaluate this condition as true before acquiring the lock. This results
> in both threads entering the critical section and modifying
> tc6->ongoing_tx_skb, causing inconsistent state updates or overwriting
> each other's changes.
>
> Consider the following scenario. A race window exists in the sequence:
>
> Thread1 Thread2
> ------------------------ ------------------------
> - if ongoing_tx_skb is NULL
> - if ongoing_tx_skb is NULL
> - spin_lock_bh()
> - ongoing_tx_skb = waiting_tx_skb
> - waiting_tx_skb = NULL
> - spin_unlock_bh()
> - spin_lock_bh()
> - ongoing_tx_skb = waiting_tx_skb
> - waiting_tx_skb = NULL
> - spin_unlock_bh()
I don't think this scenario/sequence exists as the ongoing_tx_skb is not
shared between two threads. waiting_tx_skb alone is shared between
oa_tc6_start_xmit() and oa_tc6_spi_thread_handler(). ongoing_tx_skb is
used only in the oa_tc6_spi_thread_handler() thread and it is
sequential. So in my opinion, as done before, protecting waiting_tx_skb
alone is enough and no need to protect ongoing_tx_skb.
Best regards,
Parthiban V
>
> This leads to lost updates between ongoing_tx_skb and waiting_tx_skb
> fields. Moving the NULL check inside the critical section ensures both
> the NULL check and the assignment are protected by the same lock,
> maintaining atomic check-and-set operations.
>
> Fixes: e592b5110b3e ("net: ethernet: oa_tc6: fix tx skb race condition between reference pointers")
> Closes: https://scan7.scan.coverity.com/#/project-view/52337/11354?selectedIssue=1602611
> Signed-off-by: Dheeraj Reddy Jonnalagadda <dheeraj.linuxdev@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/oa_tc6.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/oa_tc6.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/oa_tc6.c
> index db200e4ec284..66d55ec9bc88 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/oa_tc6.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/oa_tc6.c
> @@ -1004,12 +1004,12 @@ static u16 oa_tc6_prepare_spi_tx_buf_for_tx_skbs(struct oa_tc6 *tc6)
> */
> for (used_tx_credits = 0; used_tx_credits < tc6->tx_credits;
> used_tx_credits++) {
> + spin_lock_bh(&tc6->tx_skb_lock);
> if (!tc6->ongoing_tx_skb) {
> - spin_lock_bh(&tc6->tx_skb_lock);
> tc6->ongoing_tx_skb = tc6->waiting_tx_skb;
> tc6->waiting_tx_skb = NULL;
> - spin_unlock_bh(&tc6->tx_skb_lock);
> }
> + spin_unlock_bh(&tc6->tx_skb_lock);
> if (!tc6->ongoing_tx_skb)
> break;
> oa_tc6_add_tx_skb_to_spi_buf(tc6);
> --
> 2.34.1
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-12-19 12:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-19 6:59 Dheeraj Reddy Jonnalagadda
2024-12-19 12:06 ` Parthiban.Veerasooran [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=925aa1c5-f4a2-4042-92da-7cee6cb8b3d0@microchip.com \
--to=parthiban.veerasooran@microchip.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dheeraj.linuxdev@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®