Hi Chenbo,
But same issue happens when you deleted 'vsocket->socket_fd' but failed to
delete one
of the conn_fd: you will goto again and try to delete socket_fd again and then
loop
forever. So anyway you need to prevent this from happening.
==>
It will not happen, because fdset_try_del only returns -1 when the fd exists
and is busy.
E.g., when thread1 deleted 'vsocket->socket_fd' but failed to delete one of the
conn_fd,
it will go to again and try to delete socket again, and it will not fail,
because 'vsocket->socket_fd' has been deleted and fdset_try_del returns 0.
Thread1 will continue to delete the left conn_fd.
Thanks.
Gaoxiang
On 09/06/2021 11:18, Xia, Chenbo wrote:
Hi Gaoxiang,
>
>
>From: Gaoxiang Liu <gaoxiangl...@163.com>
>Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 11:38 PM
>To: Xia, Chenbo <chenbo....@intel.com>
>Cc: maxime.coque...@redhat.com; dev@dpdk.org; liugaoxi...@huawei.com
>Subject: Re:RE: [PATCH v6] vhost: fix crash on port deletion
>
>
>Hi chenbo,
>why this is not moved up?
>>> + if (vsocket->is_server) {
>>> + close(vsocket->socket_fd);
>>> + unlink(path);
>>> }
>==>Because if this is moved up, and if deleting conn fd from fdsets failed,
>it will arrive the "again" label, then close vsocket->socket_fd and uplink
>"path" again.
>it's not necessary.
>And closing socket_fd does not trigger vhost_user_server_new_connection.
But same issue happens when you deleted 'vsocket->socket_fd' but failed to
delete one
of the conn_fd: you will goto again and try to delete socket_fd again and then
loop
forever. So anyway you need to prevent this from happening.
Thanks,
Chenbo
>
>Thanks.
>Gaoxiang
At 2021-08-31 13:37:38, "Xia, Chenbo" <mailto:chenbo....@intel.com> wrote:
>Hi Gaoxiang,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Gaoxiang Liu <mailto:gaoxiangl...@163.com>
>> Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 10:19 PM
>> To: mailto:maxime.coque...@redhat.com; Xia, Chenbo
>> <mailto:chenbo....@intel.com>
>> Cc: mailto:dev@dpdk.org; mailto:liugaoxi...@huawei.com; Gaoxiang Liu
>> <mailto:gaoxiangl...@163.com>
>> Subject: [PATCH v6] vhost: fix crash on port deletion
>>
>> The rte_vhost_driver_unregister() and vhost_user_read_cb()
>> can be called at the same time by 2 threads.
>> when memory of vsocket is freed in rte_vhost_driver_unregister(),
>> the invalid memory of vsocket is accessed in vhost_user_read_cb().
>> It's a bug of both mode for vhost as server or client.
>>
>> E.g.,vhostuser port is created as server.
>
>Put a space after ','
>
>> Thread1 calls rte_vhost_driver_unregister().
>> Before the listen fd is deleted from poll waiting fds,
>> "vhost-events" thread then calls vhost_user_server_new_connection(),
>> then a new conn fd is added in fdset when trying to reconnect.
>> "vhost-events" thread then calls vhost_user_read_cb() and
>> accesses invalid memory of socket while thread1 frees the memory of
>> vsocket.
>>
>> E.g.,vhostuser port is created as client.
>
>Same here.
>
>> Thread1 calls rte_vhost_driver_unregister().
>> Before vsocket of reconn is deleted from reconn list,
>> "vhost_reconn" thread then calls vhost_user_add_connection()
>> then a new conn fd is added in fdset when trying to reconnect.
>> "vhost-events" thread then calls vhost_user_read_cb() and
>> accesses invalid memory of socket while thread1 frees the memory of
>> vsocket.
>>
>> The fix is to move the "fdset_try_del" in front of free memory of conn,
>> then avoid the race condition.
>>
>> The core trace is:
>> Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.
>>
>> Fixes: 52d874dc6705 ("vhost: fix crash on closing in client mode")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gaoxiang Liu <mailto:liugaoxi...@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>
>> v2:
>> * Fix coding style issues.
>>
>> v3:
>> * Add detailed log.
>>
>> v4:
>> * Add the reason, when vhostuser port is created as server.
>>
>> v5:
>> * Add detailed log when vhostuser port is created as client
>>
>> v6:
>> * Add 'path' check before deleting listen fd
>> * Fix spelling issues
>> ---
>> lib/vhost/socket.c | 108 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/lib/vhost/socket.c b/lib/vhost/socket.c
>> index 5d0d728d5..27d5e8695 100644
>> --- a/lib/vhost/socket.c
>> +++ b/lib/vhost/socket.c
>> @@ -1023,66 +1023,66 @@ rte_vhost_driver_unregister(const char *path)
>>
>> for (i = 0; i < vhost_user.vsocket_cnt; i++) {
>> struct vhost_user_socket *vsocket = vhost_user.vsockets[i];
>> + if (strcmp(vsocket->path, path)) {
>> + continue;
>> + }
>
>braces {} are not necessary for single statement blocks
>
>>
>> - if (!strcmp(vsocket->path, path)) {
>> - pthread_mutex_lock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>> - for (conn = TAILQ_FIRST(&vsocket->conn_list);
>> - conn != NULL;
>> - conn = next) {
>> - next = TAILQ_NEXT(conn, next);
>> -
>> - /*
>> - * If r/wcb is executing, release vsocket's
>> - * conn_mutex and vhost_user's mutex locks, and
>> - * try again since the r/wcb may use the
>> - * conn_mutex and mutex locks.
>> - */
>> - if (fdset_try_del(&vhost_user.fdset,
>> - conn->connfd) == -1) {
>> - pthread_mutex_unlock(
>> - &vsocket->conn_mutex);
>> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&vhost_user.mutex);
>> - goto again;
>> - }
>> -
>> - VHOST_LOG_CONFIG(INFO,
>> - "free connfd = %d for device '%s'\n",
>> - conn->connfd, path);
>> - close(conn->connfd);
>> - vhost_destroy_device(conn->vid);
>> - TAILQ_REMOVE(&vsocket->conn_list, conn, next);
>> - free(conn);
>> - }
>> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>> -
>> - if (vsocket->is_server) {
>> - /*
>> - * If r/wcb is executing, release vhost_user's
>> - * mutex lock, and try again since the r/wcb
>> - * may use the mutex lock.
>> - */
>> - if (fdset_try_del(&vhost_user.fdset,
>> - vsocket->socket_fd) == -1) {
>> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&vhost_user.mutex);
>> - goto again;
>> - }
>> -
>> - close(vsocket->socket_fd);
>> - unlink(path);
>> - } else if (vsocket->reconnect) {
>> - vhost_user_remove_reconnect(vsocket);
>> + if (vsocket->is_server) {
>> + /*
>> + * If r/wcb is executing, release vhost_user's
>> + * mutex lock, and try again since the r/wcb
>> + * may use the mutex lock.
>> + */
>> + if (fdset_try_del(&vhost_user.fdset, vsocket->socket_fd) ==
>> -1) {
>> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&vhost_user.mutex);
>> + goto again;
>> }
>> + } else if (vsocket->reconnect) {
>> + vhost_user_remove_reconnect(vsocket);
>> + }
>>
>> - pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>> - vhost_user_socket_mem_free(vsocket);
>> + pthread_mutex_lock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>> + for (conn = TAILQ_FIRST(&vsocket->conn_list);
>> + conn != NULL;
>> + conn = next) {
>> + next = TAILQ_NEXT(conn, next);
>>
>> - count = --vhost_user.vsocket_cnt;
>> - vhost_user.vsockets[i] = vhost_user.vsockets[count];
>> - vhost_user.vsockets[count] = NULL;
>> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&vhost_user.mutex);
>> + /*
>> + * If r/wcb is executing, release vsocket's
>> + * conn_mutex and vhost_user's mutex locks, and
>> + * try again since the r/wcb may use the
>> + * conn_mutex and mutex locks.
>> + */
>> + if (fdset_try_del(&vhost_user.fdset,
>> + conn->connfd) == -1) {
>> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&vhost_user.mutex);
>> + goto again;
>> + }
>> +
>> + VHOST_LOG_CONFIG(INFO,
>> + "free connfd = %d for device '%s'\n",
>> + conn->connfd, path);
>> + close(conn->connfd);
>> + vhost_destroy_device(conn->vid);
>> + TAILQ_REMOVE(&vsocket->conn_list, conn, next);
>> + free(conn);
>> + }
>> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>>
>> - return 0;
>> + if (vsocket->is_server) {
>> + close(vsocket->socket_fd);
>> + unlink(path);
>> }
>
>I think you miss my comment in V5 of asking why this is not moved up after
>fdset_try_del server socket fd.
>
>Thanks,
>Chenbo
>
>> +
>> + pthread_mutex_destroy(&vsocket->conn_mutex);
>> + vhost_user_socket_mem_free(vsocket);
>> +
>> + count = --vhost_user.vsocket_cnt;
>> + vhost_user.vsockets[i] = vhost_user.vsockets[count];
>> + vhost_user.vsockets[count] = NULL;
>> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&vhost_user.mutex);
>> + return 0;
>> }
>> pthread_mutex_unlock(&vhost_user.mutex);
>>
>> --
>> 2.32.0
>>
>
