: bug fix in multipath drr code.
Subsystems (3)
PATCH 1/1 : bug fix in multipath drr code.
hi
AFAIU, there is a race condition in multipath_drr code,
these code paths try to access & change last_selection variable without any synchronization.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Code Path - 1
__ip_route_output_key(...)
{
...
calls drr_select_route
if(FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE set){
check last_selection.
return last_selection //so it can return NULL pointer
} ....
}
Code Path - 2
rt_secret_rebuild()
{
.....
rt_run_flush(..);
->rt_free(rth);
-> multipath_remove(rt)
->drr_remove()
reset last_selection.....
}
Attached patch also fixes bug in function drr_init ::multipath_alg_register(..) is called with wrong algorithm ID.
Regards
Pravin.
Signed-off by: Pravin B. Shelar <[email protected]>
net/ipv4/multipath_drr.c +8 -6
@@ -145,11 +145,13 @@int cur_min_devidx =-1 ;/* if necessary and possible utilize the old alternative */ -if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 && - last_selection !=NULL ) { - result = last_selection; - *rp = result; -return ; +if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 ) { +struct rtable *last_result = last_selection; +if (last_result !=NULL && +multipath_comparekeys (&last_result->fl, flp)) { + *rp = last_result; +return ; + } }/* 1. make sure all alt. nexthops have the same GC related data */
@@ -244,7 +246,7 @@if (err)return err; - err =multipath_alg_register (&drr_ops,IP_MP_ALG_RR ); + err =multipath_alg_register (&drr_ops,IP_MP_ALG_DRR );if (err) goto fail;
net/ipv4/multipath_rr.c +7 -4
@@ -64,10 +64,13 @@int min_use =-1 ;/* if necessary and possible utilize the old alternative */ -if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 && - last_used !=NULL ) { - result = last_used; - goto out; +if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 ) { +struct rtable *last_result = last_used; +if (last_result !=NULL && +multipath_comparekeys (&last_result->fl, flp)) { + result = last_result; + goto out; + } }/* 1. make sure all alt. nexthops have the same GC related data
Quoted 3 lines · pravin
AFAIU, there is a race condition in
multipath_drrcode,
these code paths try to access & changelast_selectionvariable without any synchronization.
Yes you're right.
Quoted 11 lines
Index:
linux-2.6.12-rc4/net/ipv4/multipath_drr.c
===================================================================net/ipv4/multipath_drr.c +0
-3@@ -145,11 +145,13 @@int cur_min_devidx =-1 ;/* if necessary and possible utilize the old alternative */ -if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 && - last_selection !=NULL ) { - result = last_selection;
net/ipv4/multipath_drr.c line 155
Quoted 10 lines
net/ipv4/multipath_drr.c +7
-2- *rp = result; -return ; +if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 ) { +struct rtable *last_result = last_selection; +if (last_result !=NULL && +multipath_comparekeys (&last_result->fl, flp)) { + *rp = last_result; +return ; + } }
You don't need all this code. All you need to do is do result = last_selection before the if condition and then check result in the if condition instead of last_selection.
The multipath_comparekeys isn't necessary either.
Cheers,
Signature · 4 lines
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[email protected]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txtQuoted 24 lines · Herbert Xu
Quoted 13 lines · pravin
/* if necessary and possible utilize the old alternative */net/ipv4/multipath_drr.c +7
-5-if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 && - last_selection !=NULL ) { - result = last_selection; - *rp = result; -return ; +if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 ) { +struct rtable *last_result = last_selection; +if (last_result !=NULL && +multipath_comparekeys (&last_result->fl, flp)) { + *rp = last_result; +return ; + }Quoted 3 lines
}You don't need all this code. All you need to do is do result =
last_selectionbefore the if condition and then check result in the if condition instead oflast_selection.
Quoted 4 lines
The
multipath_comparekeysisn't necessary either.
In concurrent invocations of drr_select_route() last_selection will change to different route.
So in that case we can not use last_selection route on basis of FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE flag only, since old
route might be totally different due another invocation of same function. So, I think multipath_comparekeys is necessary.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
Regards,
Pravin.
Quoted 9 lines · pravin b shelar
Quoted 2 lines
The
multipath_comparekeysisn't necessary either.In concurrent invocations of
drr_select_route()last_selectionwill change to different route.
So in that case we can not uselast_selectionroute on basis ofFLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTEflag only, since old
route might be totally different due another invocation of same function. So, I thinkmultipath_comparekeysis necessary.
Indeed. In fact this whole MULTIPATHOLDROUTE thing can't possibly work at all. I'd suggest that it be removed.
Cheers,
Signature · 4 lines
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[email protected]>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txtQuoted 7 lines · Herbert Xu
On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 12:16:38PM +0530, pravin b shelar wrote:
In fact this whole MULTIPATHOLDROUTE thing can't possibly work at all. I'd suggest that it be removed.
So I think we should ignore MULTIPATHOLDROUTE flag
in drr and rr multipath algorithms as done in random multipath algorithm.
Attached patch does same thing.
Regards,
Pravin.
Signed-off by: Pravin B. Shelar <[email protected]>
include/net/route.h +0 -3
@@ -181,9 +181,6 @@memcpy (&fl, &(*rp)->fl,sizeof (fl)); fl.fl_ip_sport = sport; fl.fl_ip_dport = dport; -#if defined(CONFIG_IP_ROUTE_MULTIPATH_CACHED ) - fl.flags |=FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ; -#endif ip_rt_put (*rp); *rp =NULL ;return ip_route_output_flow (rp, &fl, sk,0 );
net/ipv4/multipath_drr.c +1 -17
@@ -57,7 +57,6 @@static struct multipath_device state[MULTIPATH_MAX_DEVICECANDIDATES ];static DEFINE_SPINLOCK (state_lock); -static struct rtable *last_selection =NULL ;static int inline __multipath_findslot (void ) {
@@ -111,11 +110,6 @@ .notifier_call = drr_dev_event, }; -static void drr_remove (struct rtable *rt) -{ -if (last_selection == rt) - last_selection =NULL ; -}static void drr_safe_inc (atomic_t *usecount) {
@@ -144,14 +138,6 @@int devidx =-1 ;int cur_min_devidx =-1 ; -/* if necessary and possible utilize the old alternative */ -if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 && - last_selection !=NULL ) { - result = last_selection; - *rp = result; -return ; - } -/* 1. make sure all alt. nexthops have the same GC related data */ /* 2. determine the new candidate to be returned */ result =NULL ;
@@ -229,12 +215,10 @@ } *rp = result; - last_selection = result; }static struct ip_mp_alg_ops drr_ops = { .mp_alg_select_route = drr_select_route, - .mp_alg_remove = drr_remove, };static int __init drr_init (void )
@@ -244,7 +228,7 @@if (err)return err; - err =multipath_alg_register (&drr_ops,IP_MP_ALG_RR ); + err =multipath_alg_register (&drr_ops,IP_MP_ALG_DRR );if (err) goto fail;
net/ipv4/multipath_rr.c +0 -20
@@ -47,29 +47,12 @@#include <net/checksum.h> #include <net/ip_mp_alg.h> -#define MULTIPATH_MAX_CANDIDATES 40 - -static struct rtable * last_used =NULL ; - -static void rr_remove (struct rtable *rt) -{ -if (last_used == rt) - last_used =NULL ; -} -static void rr_select_route (const struct flowi *flp,struct rtable *first,struct rtable **rp) {struct rtable *nh, *result, *min_use_cand =NULL ;int min_use =-1 ; -/* if necessary and possible utilize the old alternative */ -if ((flp->flags &FLOWI_FLAG_MULTIPATHOLDROUTE ) !=0 && - last_used !=NULL ) { - result = last_used; - goto out; - } -/* 1. make sure all alt. nexthops have the same GC related data * 2. determine the new candidate to be returned */
@@ -90,15 +73,12 @@if (!result) result = first; -out: - last_used = result; result->u.dst.__use++; *rp = result; }static struct ip_mp_alg_ops rr_ops = { .mp_alg_select_route = rr_select_route, - .mp_alg_remove = rr_remove, };static int __init rr_init (void )
From: pravin b shelar <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 15:27:16 +0530
Quoted 4 lines
So I think we should ignore MULTIPATHOLDROUTE flag
in drr and rr multipath algorithms as done in random multipath algorithm.Attached patch does same thing.
I've applied this patch, thanks.