Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] ipvs: add missing lock in ip_vs_ftp_init_conn()
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
Date: 2012-06-29 08:59:49
Also in:
lkml, lvs-devel, netfilter-devel
Hello, On Fri, 29 Jun 2012, Xiaotian Feng wrote:
quoted
On Thu, 28 Jun 2012, Xiaotian Feng wrote:quoted
We met a kernel panic in 2.6.32.43 kernel: [2680191.848044] IPVS: ip_vs_conn_hash(): request for already hashed, called from run_timer_softirq+0x175/0x1d0 <snip> [2680311.849009] general protection fault: 0000 [#1] SMP
What we see here is 120 seconds between 2680191 and 2680311. It can mean 2 things: - some state timeout, it depends on your forwarding method. What is it? NAT? DR? - 60 seconds for ip_vs_conn_expire retries
quoted
quoted
After code review, the only chance that kernel change connection flag without protection is in ip_vs_ftp_init_conn().Hm, ip_vs_ftp_init_conn is called before 1st hashing, from ip_vs_bind_app() in ip_vs_conn_new() before ip_vs_conn_hash(). It should be another problem with the flags. How different is IPVS in 2.6.32.43 compared to recent kernels? If commit aea9d711 is present, I'm not aware of other similar problems.ip_vs_bind_app() is also called by ip_vs_try_bind_dest(), which can be traced to ip_vs_proc_conn(). I've checked the changes in upstream, but nothing helps since aea9d711 has been taken into 2.6.32.28 kernel.
OK, this fix should make it safe for master-backup sync and it should be applied but I suspect you are not using sync, right? And then this fix will not solve the oops. There are no many places that rehash conn: ip_vs_conn_fill_cport - used for FTP ip_vs_check_template: - do you have persistence configured? After you provide details for the used forwarding method, persistence and sync we should think how such races with rehashing can lead to double hlist_del. May be you can modify the debug message in ip_vs_conn_hash, so that we can see cp->flags and ntohs of cp->cport, cp->dport and cp->vport when oops happens again. Regards -- Julian Anastasov [off-list ref]