forked from luck/tmp_suning_uos_patched
bpf: Do not use bucket_lock for hashmap iterator
Currently, for hashmap, the bpf iterator will grab a bucket lock, a spinlock, before traversing the elements in the bucket. This can ensure all bpf visted elements are valid. But this mechanism may cause deadlock if update/deletion happens to the same bucket of the visited map in the program. For example, if we added bpf_map_update_elem() call to the same visited element in selftests bpf_iter_bpf_hash_map.c, we will have the following deadlock: ============================================ WARNING: possible recursive locking detected 5.9.0-rc1+ #841 Not tainted -------------------------------------------- test_progs/1750 is trying to acquire lock: ffff9a5bb73c5e70 (&htab->buckets[i].raw_lock){....}-{2:2}, at: htab_map_update_elem+0x1cf/0x410 but task is already holding lock: ffff9a5bb73c5e20 (&htab->buckets[i].raw_lock){....}-{2:2}, at: bpf_hash_map_seq_find_next+0x94/0x120 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(&htab->buckets[i].raw_lock); lock(&htab->buckets[i].raw_lock); *** DEADLOCK *** ... Call Trace: dump_stack+0x78/0xa0 __lock_acquire.cold.74+0x209/0x2e3 lock_acquire+0xba/0x380 ? htab_map_update_elem+0x1cf/0x410 ? __lock_acquire+0x639/0x20c0 _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x3b/0x80 ? htab_map_update_elem+0x1cf/0x410 htab_map_update_elem+0x1cf/0x410 ? lock_acquire+0xba/0x380 bpf_prog_ad6dab10433b135d_dump_bpf_hash_map+0x88/0xa9c ? find_held_lock+0x34/0xa0 bpf_iter_run_prog+0x81/0x16e __bpf_hash_map_seq_show+0x145/0x180 bpf_seq_read+0xff/0x3d0 vfs_read+0xad/0x1c0 ksys_read+0x5f/0xe0 do_syscall_64+0x33/0x40 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9 ... The bucket_lock first grabbed in seq_ops->next() called by bpf_seq_read(), and then grabbed again in htab_map_update_elem() in the bpf program, causing deadlocks. Actually, we do not need bucket_lock here, we can just use rcu_read_lock() similar to netlink iterator where the rcu_read_{lock,unlock} likes below: seq_ops->start(): rcu_read_lock(); seq_ops->next(): rcu_read_unlock(); /* next element */ rcu_read_lock(); seq_ops->stop(); rcu_read_unlock(); Compared to old bucket_lock mechanism, if concurrent updata/delete happens, we may visit stale elements, miss some elements, or repeat some elements. I think this is a reasonable compromise. For users wanting to avoid stale, missing/repeated accesses, bpf_map batch access syscall interface can be used. Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200902235340.2001375-1-yhs@fb.com
This commit is contained in:
parent
21e9ba5373
commit
dc0988bbe1
|
@ -1622,7 +1622,6 @@ struct bpf_iter_seq_hash_map_info {
|
|||
struct bpf_map *map;
|
||||
struct bpf_htab *htab;
|
||||
void *percpu_value_buf; // non-zero means percpu hash
|
||||
unsigned long flags;
|
||||
u32 bucket_id;
|
||||
u32 skip_elems;
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
@ -1632,7 +1631,6 @@ bpf_hash_map_seq_find_next(struct bpf_iter_seq_hash_map_info *info,
|
|||
struct htab_elem *prev_elem)
|
||||
{
|
||||
const struct bpf_htab *htab = info->htab;
|
||||
unsigned long flags = info->flags;
|
||||
u32 skip_elems = info->skip_elems;
|
||||
u32 bucket_id = info->bucket_id;
|
||||
struct hlist_nulls_head *head;
|
||||
|
@ -1656,19 +1654,18 @@ bpf_hash_map_seq_find_next(struct bpf_iter_seq_hash_map_info *info,
|
|||
|
||||
/* not found, unlock and go to the next bucket */
|
||||
b = &htab->buckets[bucket_id++];
|
||||
htab_unlock_bucket(htab, b, flags);
|
||||
rcu_read_unlock();
|
||||
skip_elems = 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
for (i = bucket_id; i < htab->n_buckets; i++) {
|
||||
b = &htab->buckets[i];
|
||||
flags = htab_lock_bucket(htab, b);
|
||||
rcu_read_lock();
|
||||
|
||||
count = 0;
|
||||
head = &b->head;
|
||||
hlist_nulls_for_each_entry_rcu(elem, n, head, hash_node) {
|
||||
if (count >= skip_elems) {
|
||||
info->flags = flags;
|
||||
info->bucket_id = i;
|
||||
info->skip_elems = count;
|
||||
return elem;
|
||||
|
@ -1676,7 +1673,7 @@ bpf_hash_map_seq_find_next(struct bpf_iter_seq_hash_map_info *info,
|
|||
count++;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
htab_unlock_bucket(htab, b, flags);
|
||||
rcu_read_unlock();
|
||||
skip_elems = 0;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -1754,14 +1751,10 @@ static int bpf_hash_map_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
|
|||
|
||||
static void bpf_hash_map_seq_stop(struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct bpf_iter_seq_hash_map_info *info = seq->private;
|
||||
|
||||
if (!v)
|
||||
(void)__bpf_hash_map_seq_show(seq, NULL);
|
||||
else
|
||||
htab_unlock_bucket(info->htab,
|
||||
&info->htab->buckets[info->bucket_id],
|
||||
info->flags);
|
||||
rcu_read_unlock();
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static int bpf_iter_init_hash_map(void *priv_data,
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user