[bug report] vhost_net: basic polling support

3 messages, 2 authors, 2021-08-11 · open the first message on its own page

[bug report] vhost_net: basic polling support

From: Dan Carpenter <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-11 12:14:07

Hello Jason Wang,

The patch 030881372460: "vhost_net: basic polling support" from Mar
4, 2016, leads to the following
Smatch static checker warning:

	drivers/vhost/vhost.c:2565 vhost_new_msg()
	warn: sleeping in atomic context

vers/vhost/net.c
   509  static void vhost_net_busy_poll(struct vhost_net *net,
   510                                  struct vhost_virtqueue *rvq,
   511                                  struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq,
   512                                  bool *busyloop_intr,
   513                                  bool poll_rx)
   514  {
   515          unsigned long busyloop_timeout;
   516          unsigned long endtime;
   517          struct socket *sock;
   518          struct vhost_virtqueue *vq = poll_rx ? tvq : rvq;
   519  
   520          /* Try to hold the vq mutex of the paired virtqueue. We can't
   521           * use mutex_lock() here since we could not guarantee a
   522           * consistenet lock ordering.
   523           */
   524          if (!mutex_trylock(&vq->mutex))
   525                  return;
   526  
   527          vhost_disable_notify(&net->dev, vq);
   528          sock = vhost_vq_get_backend(rvq);
   529  
   530          busyloop_timeout = poll_rx ? rvq->busyloop_timeout:
   531                                       tvq->busyloop_timeout;
   532  
   533          preempt_disable();
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This bumps the preemp_count.

I guess this is to disable page faults?

   534          endtime = busy_clock() + busyloop_timeout;
   535  
   536          while (vhost_can_busy_poll(endtime)) {
   537                  if (vhost_has_work(&net->dev)) {
   538                          *busyloop_intr = true;
   539                          break;
   540                  }
   541  
   542                  if ((sock_has_rx_data(sock) &&
   543                       !vhost_vq_avail_empty(&net->dev, rvq)) ||

The call tree from here to the GFP_KERNEL is very long...

vhost_vq_avail_empty()
-> vhost_get_avail_idx()
   -> __vhost_get_user()
      -> __vhost_get_user_slow()
         -> translate_desc()
            -> vhost_iotlb_miss vhost_new_msg()  <-- GFP_KERNEL

   544                      !vhost_vq_avail_empty(&net->dev, tvq))
   545                          break;
   546  
   547                  cpu_relax();
   548          }
   549  
   550          preempt_enable();
   551  
   552          if (poll_rx || sock_has_rx_data(sock))
   553                  vhost_net_busy_poll_try_queue(net, vq);

regards,
dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Re: [bug report] vhost_net: basic polling support

From: Jason Wang <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-11 12:51:45

Hi Dan:

On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 8:14 PM Dan Carpenter [off-list ref] wrote:
Hello Jason Wang,

The patch 030881372460: "vhost_net: basic polling support" from Mar
4, 2016, leads to the following
Smatch static checker warning:

        drivers/vhost/vhost.c:2565 vhost_new_msg()
        warn: sleeping in atomic context

vers/vhost/net.c
   509  static void vhost_net_busy_poll(struct vhost_net *net,
   510                                  struct vhost_virtqueue *rvq,
   511                                  struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq,
   512                                  bool *busyloop_intr,
   513                                  bool poll_rx)
   514  {
   515          unsigned long busyloop_timeout;
   516          unsigned long endtime;
   517          struct socket *sock;
   518          struct vhost_virtqueue *vq = poll_rx ? tvq : rvq;
   519
   520          /* Try to hold the vq mutex of the paired virtqueue. We can't
   521           * use mutex_lock() here since we could not guarantee a
   522           * consistenet lock ordering.
   523           */
   524          if (!mutex_trylock(&vq->mutex))
   525                  return;
   526
   527          vhost_disable_notify(&net->dev, vq);
   528          sock = vhost_vq_get_backend(rvq);
   529
   530          busyloop_timeout = poll_rx ? rvq->busyloop_timeout:
   531                                       tvq->busyloop_timeout;
   532
   533          preempt_disable();
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This bumps the preemp_count.

I guess this is to disable page faults?
No, it's intended since we will use busy_clock() which uses the per
cpu variable.
   534          endtime = busy_clock() + busyloop_timeout;
   535
   536          while (vhost_can_busy_poll(endtime)) {
   537                  if (vhost_has_work(&net->dev)) {
   538                          *busyloop_intr = true;
   539                          break;
   540                  }
   541
   542                  if ((sock_has_rx_data(sock) &&
   543                       !vhost_vq_avail_empty(&net->dev, rvq)) ||

The call tree from here to the GFP_KERNEL is very long...

vhost_vq_avail_empty()
-> vhost_get_avail_idx()
   -> __vhost_get_user()
      -> __vhost_get_user_slow()
         -> translate_desc()
            -> vhost_iotlb_miss vhost_new_msg()  <-- GFP_KERNEL
This won't happen in reality since:

We will make sure the IOTLB contains the translation for avail idx.
See vq_meta_prefetch() that will be called at the begining of
handle_tx() and handle_rx().

So it looks like a false positive to me.

Thanks
   544                      !vhost_vq_avail_empty(&net->dev, tvq))
   545                          break;
   546
   547                  cpu_relax();
   548          }
   549
   550          preempt_enable();
   551
   552          if (poll_rx || sock_has_rx_data(sock))
   553                  vhost_net_busy_poll_try_queue(net, vq);

regards,
dan carpenter
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

Re: [bug report] vhost_net: basic polling support

From: Dan Carpenter <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-11 13:32:41

On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 08:51:22PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
Hi Dan:

On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 8:14 PM Dan Carpenter [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hello Jason Wang,

The patch 030881372460: "vhost_net: basic polling support" from Mar
4, 2016, leads to the following
Smatch static checker warning:

        drivers/vhost/vhost.c:2565 vhost_new_msg()
        warn: sleeping in atomic context

vers/vhost/net.c
   509  static void vhost_net_busy_poll(struct vhost_net *net,
   510                                  struct vhost_virtqueue *rvq,
   511                                  struct vhost_virtqueue *tvq,
   512                                  bool *busyloop_intr,
   513                                  bool poll_rx)
   514  {
   515          unsigned long busyloop_timeout;
   516          unsigned long endtime;
   517          struct socket *sock;
   518          struct vhost_virtqueue *vq = poll_rx ? tvq : rvq;
   519
   520          /* Try to hold the vq mutex of the paired virtqueue. We can't
   521           * use mutex_lock() here since we could not guarantee a
   522           * consistenet lock ordering.
   523           */
   524          if (!mutex_trylock(&vq->mutex))
   525                  return;
   526
   527          vhost_disable_notify(&net->dev, vq);
   528          sock = vhost_vq_get_backend(rvq);
   529
   530          busyloop_timeout = poll_rx ? rvq->busyloop_timeout:
   531                                       tvq->busyloop_timeout;
   532
   533          preempt_disable();
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This bumps the preemp_count.

I guess this is to disable page faults?
No, it's intended since we will use busy_clock() which uses the per
cpu variable.
quoted
   534          endtime = busy_clock() + busyloop_timeout;
   535
   536          while (vhost_can_busy_poll(endtime)) {
   537                  if (vhost_has_work(&net->dev)) {
   538                          *busyloop_intr = true;
   539                          break;
   540                  }
   541
   542                  if ((sock_has_rx_data(sock) &&
   543                       !vhost_vq_avail_empty(&net->dev, rvq)) ||

The call tree from here to the GFP_KERNEL is very long...

vhost_vq_avail_empty()
-> vhost_get_avail_idx()
   -> __vhost_get_user()
      -> __vhost_get_user_slow()
         -> translate_desc()
            -> vhost_iotlb_miss vhost_new_msg()  <-- GFP_KERNEL
This won't happen in reality since:

We will make sure the IOTLB contains the translation for avail idx.
See vq_meta_prefetch() that will be called at the begining of
handle_tx() and handle_rx().

So it looks like a false positive to me.
Thanks for looking at this.  These warnings are very complicated for
me to review because of the long call trees...  Smatch is pretty good
at tracking state within a function but at the function boundaries a
lot of state is lost.

regards,
dan carpenter

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help