Re: [PATCH RFC v1 1/3] r8169: fix the KCSAN reported data-race in rtl_tx() while reading tp->cur_tx
From: Heiner Kallweit
Date: Sun Oct 22 2023 - 17:29:53 EST
On 22.10.2023 19:24, Mirsad Todorovac wrote:
> On 9/27/23 21:52, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> On 27.09.2023 20:41, Mirsad Goran Todorovac wrote:
>>> KCSAN reported the following data-race:
>>>
>>> ==================================================================
>>> BUG: KCSAN: data-race in rtl8169_poll [r8169] / rtl8169_start_xmit [r8169]
>>>
>>> write (marked) to 0xffff888102474b74 of 4 bytes by task 5358 on cpu 29:
>>> rtl8169_start_xmit (drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c:4254) r8169
>>> dev_hard_start_xmit (./include/linux/netdevice.h:4889 ./include/linux/netdevice.h:4903 net/core/dev.c:3544 net/core/dev.c:3560)
>>> sch_direct_xmit (net/sched/sch_generic.c:342)
>>> __dev_queue_xmit (net/core/dev.c:3817 net/core/dev.c:4306)
>>> ip_finish_output2 (./include/linux/netdevice.h:3082 ./include/net/neighbour.h:526 ./include/net/neighbour.h:540 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:233)
>>> __ip_finish_output (net/ipv4/ip_output.c:311 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:293)
>>> ip_finish_output (net/ipv4/ip_output.c:328)
>>> ip_output (net/ipv4/ip_output.c:435)
>>> ip_send_skb (./include/net/dst.h:458 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:127 net/ipv4/ip_output.c:1486)
>>> udp_send_skb (net/ipv4/udp.c:963)
>>> udp_sendmsg (net/ipv4/udp.c:1246)
>>> inet_sendmsg (net/ipv4/af_inet.c:840 (discriminator 4))
>>> sock_sendmsg (net/socket.c:730 net/socket.c:753)
>>> __sys_sendto (net/socket.c:2177)
>>> __x64_sys_sendto (net/socket.c:2185)
>>> do_syscall_64 (arch/x86/entry/common.c:50 arch/x86/entry/common.c:80)
>>> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe (arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:120)
>>>
>>> read to 0xffff888102474b74 of 4 bytes by interrupt on cpu 21:
>>> rtl8169_poll (drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c:4397 drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c:4581) r8169
>>> __napi_poll (net/core/dev.c:6527)
>>> net_rx_action (net/core/dev.c:6596 net/core/dev.c:6727)
>>> __do_softirq (kernel/softirq.c:553)
>>> __irq_exit_rcu (kernel/softirq.c:427 kernel/softirq.c:632)
>>> irq_exit_rcu (kernel/softirq.c:647)
>>> common_interrupt (arch/x86/kernel/irq.c:247 (discriminator 14))
>>> asm_common_interrupt (./arch/x86/include/asm/idtentry.h:636)
>>> cpuidle_enter_state (drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c:291)
>>> cpuidle_enter (drivers/cpuidle/cpuidle.c:390)
>>> call_cpuidle (kernel/sched/idle.c:135)
>>> do_idle (kernel/sched/idle.c:219 kernel/sched/idle.c:282)
>>> cpu_startup_entry (kernel/sched/idle.c:378 (discriminator 1))
>>> start_secondary (arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c:210 arch/x86/kernel/smpboot.c:294)
>>> secondary_startup_64_no_verify (arch/x86/kernel/head_64.S:433)
>>>
>>> value changed: 0x002f4815 -> 0x002f4816
>>>
>>> Reported by Kernel Concurrency Sanitizer on:
>>> CPU: 21 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/21 Tainted: G L 6.6.0-rc2-kcsan-00143-gb5cbe7c00aa0 #41
>>> Hardware name: ASRock X670E PG Lightning/X670E PG Lightning, BIOS 1.21 04/26/2023
>>> ==================================================================
>>>
>>> The write side of drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c is:
>>> ==================
>>> 4251 /* rtl_tx needs to see descriptor changes before updated tp->cur_tx */
>>> 4252 smp_wmb();
>>> 4253
>>> → 4254 WRITE_ONCE(tp->cur_tx, tp->cur_tx + frags + 1);
>>> 4255
>>> 4256 stop_queue = !netif_subqueue_maybe_stop(dev, 0, rtl_tx_slots_avail(tp),
>>> 4257 R8169_TX_STOP_THRS,
>>> 4258 R8169_TX_START_THRS);
>>>
>>> The read side is the function rtl_tx():
>>>
>>> 4355 static void rtl_tx(struct net_device *dev, struct rtl8169_private *tp,
>>> 4356 int budget)
>>> 4357 {
>>> 4358 unsigned int dirty_tx, bytes_compl = 0, pkts_compl = 0;
>>> 4359 struct sk_buff *skb;
>>> 4360
>>> 4361 dirty_tx = tp->dirty_tx;
>>> 4362
>>> 4363 while (READ_ONCE(tp->cur_tx) != dirty_tx) {
>>> 4364 unsigned int entry = dirty_tx % NUM_TX_DESC;
>>> 4365 u32 status;
>>> 4366
>>> 4367 status = le32_to_cpu(tp->TxDescArray[entry].opts1);
>>> 4368 if (status & DescOwn)
>>> 4369 break;
>>> 4370
>>> 4371 skb = tp->tx_skb[entry].skb;
>>> 4372 rtl8169_unmap_tx_skb(tp, entry);
>>> 4373
>>> 4374 if (skb) {
>>> 4375 pkts_compl++;
>>> 4376 bytes_compl += skb->len;
>>> 4377 napi_consume_skb(skb, budget);
>>> 4378 }
>>> 4379 dirty_tx++;
>>> 4380 }
>>> 4381
>>> 4382 if (tp->dirty_tx != dirty_tx) {
>>> 4383 dev_sw_netstats_tx_add(dev, pkts_compl, bytes_compl);
>>> 4384 WRITE_ONCE(tp->dirty_tx, dirty_tx);
>>> 4385
>>> 4386 netif_subqueue_completed_wake(dev, 0, pkts_compl, bytes_compl,
>>> 4387 rtl_tx_slots_avail(tp),
>>> 4388 R8169_TX_START_THRS);
>>> 4389 /*
>>> 4390 * 8168 hack: TxPoll requests are lost when the Tx packets are
>>> 4391 * too close. Let's kick an extra TxPoll request when a burst
>>> 4392 * of start_xmit activity is detected (if it is not detected,
>>> 4393 * it is slow enough). -- FR
>>> 4394 * If skb is NULL then we come here again once a tx irq is
>>> 4395 * triggered after the last fragment is marked transmitted.
>>> 4396 */
>>> → 4397 if (tp->cur_tx != dirty_tx && skb)
>>> 4398 rtl8169_doorbell(tp);
>>> 4399 }
>>> 4400 }
>>>
>>> Obviously from the code, an earlier detected data-race for tp->cur_tx was fixed in the
>>> line 4363:
>>>
>>> 4363 while (READ_ONCE(tp->cur_tx) != dirty_tx) {
>>>
>>> but the same solution is required for protecting the other access to tp->cur_tx:
>>>
>>> → 4397 if (READ_ONCE(tp->cur_tx) != dirty_tx && skb)
>>> 4398 rtl8169_doorbell(tp);
>>>
>>> The write in the line 4254 is protected with WRITE_ONCE(), but the read in the line 4397
>>> might have suffered read tearing under some compiler optimisations.
>>>
>>> The fix eliminated the KCSAN data-race report for this bug.
>>>
>>> It is yet to be evaluated what happens if tp->cur_tx changes between the test in line 4363
>>> and line 4397. This test should certainly not be cached by the compiler in some register
>>> for such a long time, while asynchronous writes to tp->cur_tx might have occurred in line
>>> 4254 in the meantime.
>
>> netif_subqueue_completed_wake() has barriers ensuring that no cached value for tp->cur_tx
>> is used in line 4397. I'm not aware of any reported issues with an obvious link to the
>> potentential issue you describe.
>> I don't have a strong opinion on these patches. They shouldn't hurt, and if they make
>> KCSAN happy, why not.
>
> Hi, Mr. Kallweit,
>
> Your words have been taken with great weight and serious concern on my behalf, so I took
> some time to investigate (even after the patches were Ack-ed).
>
No need to be so formal. I'm just a hobbyist developer who once suddenly
found himself in a maintainer position ;)
> The question is whether we deal with a data-race or a false positive reported by KCSAN.
>
> I can indeed independently confirm that netif_subqueue_completed_wake() eventually expands to
> call to:
>
> include/net/netdev_queues.h:
> ==============================================
> /* Variant of netdev_tx_completed_queue() which guarantees smp_mb() if
> * @bytes != 0, regardless of kernel config.
> */
> static inline void
> netdev_txq_completed_mb(struct netdev_queue *dev_queue,
> unsigned int pkts, unsigned int bytes)
> {
> if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BQL))
> netdev_tx_completed_queue(dev_queue, pkts, bytes);
> else if (bytes)
> smp_mb();
> }
>
> Obviously, smp_mb() is here.
>
> On my __x86_64__ it expands to an ugly hack:
>
> #define smp_mb() asm volatile("lock; addl $0,-132(%%rsp)" ::: "memory", "cc")
>
> Thus far I concur with your findings.
>
> But I see also Mr. Elver's point:
>
> 1. With the reference to: [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v6.2/core-api/wrappers/memory-barriers.html
> compiler can do some "smart" optimisations that only work on single core, single threaded use.
>
> What comes to mind is that "struct rtl8169_private" and its members might not be on the same cache line
> with the pointer struct rtl8169_private *tp.
>
> By the exposed matter in [1], READ_ONCE() provides a way to explain to the compiler that tp->cur_tx can
> be concurrently modified by the other thread/core.
>
> To be honest, I haven't caught a network card error or a driver bug either, but only the KCSAN complaint.
>
> It would seem prudent to protect all the variables with the concurrent accesses from several cores/threads
> or devices through DMA with (READ|WRITE)_ONCE.
>
r8169 driver supports one queue only. NAPI softirq guarantees that calls to rtl8169_poll
are serialized. Threaded NAPI may be a different story, however I'm not aware of any bug
report related to threaded NAPI.
> Especially since I don't see where the callback added in drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c:5277
> is called from:
>
> netif_napi_add(dev, &tp->napi, rtl8169_poll);
>
> I am not trying to be an arbiter nor an authority on the rtl8169 driver, which would obviously be you.
>
> However, I feel compelled by something to review all the accesses to tp->cur_tx, tp->cur_tx and other
> structure members against concurrent access, and systematically. With your permission, of course.
>
> I would appreciate your mentoring on the task if you are interested.
>
> Mainly, I figured out that in:
>
> 4575 static int rtl8169_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> 4576 {
> 4577 struct rtl8169_private *tp = container_of(napi, struct rtl8169_private, napi);
> 4578 struct net_device *dev = tp->dev;
> 4579 int work_done;
> 4580
> 4581 rtl_tx(dev, tp, budget);
> 4582
> 4583 work_done = rtl_rx(dev, tp, budget);
> 4584
> 4585 if (work_done < budget && napi_complete_done(napi, work_done))
> 4586 rtl_irq_enable(tp);
> 4587
> 4588 return work_done;
> 4589 }
>
> rtl_tx() and rtl_rx() are called in sequence. Is it possible to imagine doing it in parallel?
>
Adding a separated TX NAPI is possible, question is whether it's worth the
effort. Look for users of netif_napi_add_tx() to get an idea of separated TX NAPI.
I once experimented with it in context of r8169 and didn't really find a benefit.
> Can the Realtek NIC hardware support that at all and which generations can?
>
Well, major issue with Realtek HW is that there's no public datasheets.
Only source of information is their out-of-tree drivers (r8168, r8101, r8125).
With regard to RSS: r8125 supports it, r8168 not.
> (Of course, Ethernet might be full-duplex, but PCI Express line might not be.)
>
> [2] https://www.rambus.com/blogs/pci-express-4/ Full-duplex PCI 4.0 specs.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Best regards,
> Mirsad Todorovac
>
>>> Fixes: 94d8a98e6235c ("r8169: reduce number of workaround doorbell rings")
>>> Cc: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: nic_swsd@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/dc7fc8fa-4ea4-e9a9-30a6-7c83e6b53188@xxxxxxxxxxxx/
>>> Signed-off-by: Mirsad Goran Todorovac <mirsad.todorovac@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> v1:
>>> the initial patch proposal. fixes the KCSAN warning.
>>>
>>> drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c | 2 +-
>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c
>>> index 6351a2dc13bc..281aaa851847 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/realtek/r8169_main.c
>>> @@ -4394,7 +4394,7 @@ static void rtl_tx(struct net_device *dev, struct rtl8169_private *tp,
>>> * If skb is NULL then we come here again once a tx irq is
>>> * triggered after the last fragment is marked transmitted.
>>> */
>>> - if (tp->cur_tx != dirty_tx && skb)
>>> + if (READ_ONCE(tp->cur_tx) != dirty_tx && skb)
>>> rtl8169_doorbell(tp);
>>> }
>>> }