Re: xdp/xsk.c: missing read memory barrier in xsk_poll()

From: Magnus Karlsson
Date: Fri Nov 24 2023 - 08:50:20 EST


On Fri, 24 Nov 2023 at 08:00, Yewon Choi <woni9911@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> We found some possibility of missing read memory barrier in xsk_poll(),
> so we would like to ask to check it.
>
> commit e6762c8b adds two smp_rmb() in xsk_mmap(), which are paired with
> smp_wmb() in XDP_UMEM_REG and xsk_init_queue each. The later one is
> added in order to prevent reordering between reading of q and reading
> of q->ring.
> One example in simplied code is:
>
> xsk_mmap():
> if (offset == XDP_PGOFF_RX_RING) {
> q = READ_ONCE(xs->rx);
> }
> ...
> if (!q)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> /* Matches the smp_wmb() in xsk_init_queue */
> smp_rmb();
> ...
> return remap_vmalloc_range(vma, q->ring, 0);
>
> Also, the similar logic exists in xsk_poll() without smp_rmb().
>
> xsk_poll():
> ...
> if (xs->rx && !xskq_prod_is_empty(xs->rx))
> mask |= EPOLLIN | EPOLLRDNORM;
> if (xs->tx && xsk_tx_writeable(xs))
> mask |= EPOLLOUT | EPOLLWRNORM;
>
> xskq_prod_is_empty():
> return READ_ONCE(q->ring->consumer) && ...
>
> To be consistent, I think that smp_rmb() is needed between
> xs->rx and !xsq_prod_is_empty() and the same applies for xs->tx.
>
> Could you check this please?
> If a patch is needed, we will send them.

Yes, you are correct that the current code would need an smp_rmb().
However, an unbound socket should never be allowed to enter the
xsk_poll() code in the first place since it is pointless to poll a
socket that has not been bound. This error was introduced in the
commit below:

commit 1596dae2f17ec5c6e8c8f0e3fec78c5ae55c1e0b
Author: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed Feb 15 15:33:09 2023 +0100

xsk: check IFF_UP earlier in Tx path

When an AF_XDP socket has been bound, it is guaranteed to have been
set up in the correct way and a memory barrier has already been
executed in the xsk_bind call. It would be great if you could submit a
patch, but I suggest that you do something like this instead of
introducing an smp_rmb():

if (xsk_check_common(xs))
goto out;
:
:

if (xs->rx && !xskq_prod_is_empty(xs->rx))
mask |= EPOLLIN | EPOLLRDNORM;
if (xs->tx && xsk_tx_writeable(xs))
mask |= EPOLLOUT | EPOLLWRNORM;

out:
rcu_read_unlock();
return mask;

Thank you for spotting this!

/Magnus

>
> Best Regards,
> Yewon Choi
>