Thread (1 message) 1 message, 1 author, 2016-05-18

Re: [PATCH v2] ethernet:arc: Fix racing of TX ring buffer

From: Francois Romieu <hidden>
Date: 2016-05-18 22:55:29
Also in: linux-rockchip

Lino Sanfilippo [off-list ref] :
[...]
what about the (only compile tested) code below?
I may have misunderstood some parts but it nonetheless seems broken.
The smp_wmb() in tx function combined with the smp_rmb() in tx_clean ensures
that the CPU running tx_clean sees consistent values for info, data and skb 
(thus no need to check for validity of all three values any more).
The mb() fulfills several tasks:
1. makes sure that DMA writes to descriptor are completed before the HW is
    informed.
"DMA writes" == "CPU writes" ?
2. On multi processor systems: ensures that txbd_curr is updated (this is paired
    with the smp_mb() at the end of tx_clean).
Smells like using barrier side-effects to control smp coherency. It isn't
the recommended style.
quoted hunk
3. Ensure we see the most recent value for tx_dirty. With this we do not have to
    recheck after we stopped the tx queue.

--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/arc/emac_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/arc/emac_main.c
@@ -162,8 +162,13 @@ static void arc_emac_tx_clean(struct net_device *ndev)
 		struct sk_buff *skb = tx_buff->skb;
 		unsigned int info = le32_to_cpu(txbd->info);
 
-		if ((info & FOR_EMAC) || !txbd->data || !skb)
+		if (info & FOR_EMAC) {
+			/* Make sure we see consistent values for info, skb
+			 * and data.
+			 */
+			smp_rmb();
 			break;
+		}
?

smp_rmb should appear before the variables you want coherency for.
quoted hunk
 
 		if (unlikely(info & (DROP | DEFR | LTCL | UFLO))) {
 			stats->tx_errors++;
@@ -679,36 +684,33 @@ static int arc_emac_tx(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *ndev)
 	dma_unmap_addr_set(&priv->tx_buff[*txbd_curr], addr, addr);
 	dma_unmap_len_set(&priv->tx_buff[*txbd_curr], len, len);
 
-	priv->txbd[*txbd_curr].data = cpu_to_le32(addr);
 
-	/* Make sure pointer to data buffer is set */
-	wmb();
+	priv->txbd[*txbd_curr].data = cpu_to_le32(addr);
+	priv->tx_buff[*txbd_curr].skb = skb;
 
-	skb_tx_timestamp(skb);
+	/* Make sure info is set after data and skb with respect to
+	 * other tx_clean().
+	 */
+	smp_wmb();
 
 	*info = cpu_to_le32(FOR_EMAC | FIRST_OR_LAST_MASK | len);
Afaik smp_wmb() does not imply wmb(). So priv->txbd[*txbd_curr].data and
*info (aka priv->txbd[*txbd_curr].info) are not necessarily written in
an orderly manner.
 
-	/* Make sure info word is set */
-	wmb();
-
-	priv->tx_buff[*txbd_curr].skb = skb;
-
 	/* Increment index to point to the next BD */
 	*txbd_curr = (*txbd_curr + 1) % TX_BD_NUM;
With this change it's possible that tx_clean() reads new value for
tx_curr and old value (0) for *info.
 
-	/* Ensure that tx_clean() sees the new txbd_curr before
+	/* 1.Ensure that tx_clean() sees the new txbd_curr before
 	 * checking the queue status. This prevents an unneeded wake
 	 * of the queue in tx_clean().
+	 * 2.Ensure that all values are written to RAM and to DMA
+	 * before hardware is informed.
(I am not sure what "DMA" is supposed to mean here.)
+	 * 3.Ensure we see the most recent value for tx_dirty.
 	 */
-	smp_mb();
+	mb();
 
-	if (!arc_emac_tx_avail(priv)) {
+	if (!arc_emac_tx_avail(priv))
 		netif_stop_queue(ndev);
-		/* Refresh tx_dirty */
-		smp_mb();
-		if (arc_emac_tx_avail(priv))
-			netif_start_queue(ndev);
-	}
Xmit thread                        | Clean thread

mb();

arc_emac_tx_avail() test with old
tx_dirty - tx_clean has not issued
any mb yet - and new tx_curr

                                     smp_mb();

                                     if (netif_queue_stopped(ndev) && ...
                                             netif_wake_queue(ndev);

netif_stop_queue()

-> queue stopped.

You can't remove the revalidation step.

arc_emac_tx_avail() is essentially pessimistic. Even if arc_emac_tx_avail()
was "right", there would be a tx_clean window between arc_emac_tx_avail()
and netif_stop_queue().
+
+	skb_tx_timestamp(skb);
You don't want to issue skb_tx_timestamp after releasing control of the
descriptor (*info = ...): skb may be long gone.

-- 
Ueimor
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help