lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jun]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH net v2] tcp: avoid creating multiple req socks with the same tuples
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:49 PM Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> There is one issue about bonding mode BOND_MODE_BROADCAST, and
> two slaves with diffierent affinity, so packets will be handled
> by different cpu. These are two pre-conditions in this case.
>
> When two slaves receive the same syn packets at the same time,
> two request sock(reqsk) will be created if below situation happens:
> 1. syn1 arrived tcp_conn_request, create reqsk1 and have not yet called
> inet_csk_reqsk_queue_hash_add.
> 2. syn2 arrived tcp_v4_rcv, it goes to tcp_conn_request and create
> reqsk2
> because it can't find reqsk1 in the __inet_lookup_skb.
>
> Then reqsk1 and reqsk2 are added to establish hash table, and two synack
> with different
> seq(seq1 and seq2) are sent to client, then tcp ack arrived and will be
> processed in tcp_v4_rcv and tcp_check_req, if __inet_lookup_skb find the
> reqsk2, and
> tcp ack packet is ack_seq is seq1, it will be failed after checking:
> TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->ack_seq != tcp_rsk(req)->snt_isn + 1)
> and then tcp rst will be sent to client and close the connection.
>
> To fix this, call __inet_lookup_established() before __sk_nulls_add_node_rcu()
> in inet_ehash_insert(). If there is existed reqsk with same tuples in
> established hash table, directly to remove current reqsk2, and does not send
> synack to client.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mao Wenan <maowenan@huawei.com>
> ---
> v2: move __inet_lookup_established from tcp_conn_request() to inet_ehash_insert()
> as Eric suggested.
> ---
> include/net/inet_connection_sock.h | 2 +-
> net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c | 16 ++++++++++++----
> net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> net/ipv4/tcp_input.c | 7 ++++---
> 4 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/inet_connection_sock.h b/include/net/inet_connection_sock.h
> index c57d53e7e02c..2d3538e333cb 100644
> --- a/include/net/inet_connection_sock.h
> +++ b/include/net/inet_connection_sock.h
> @@ -263,7 +263,7 @@ struct dst_entry *inet_csk_route_child_sock(const struct sock *sk,
> struct sock *inet_csk_reqsk_queue_add(struct sock *sk,
> struct request_sock *req,
> struct sock *child);
> -void inet_csk_reqsk_queue_hash_add(struct sock *sk, struct request_sock *req,
> +bool inet_csk_reqsk_queue_hash_add(struct sock *sk, struct request_sock *req,
> unsigned long timeout);
> struct sock *inet_csk_complete_hashdance(struct sock *sk, struct sock *child,
> struct request_sock *req,
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c b/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c
> index 13ec7c3a9c49..fd45ed2fd985 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c
> @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ static void reqsk_timer_handler(struct timer_list *t)
> inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop_and_put(sk_listener, req);
> }
>
> -static void reqsk_queue_hash_req(struct request_sock *req,
> +static bool reqsk_queue_hash_req(struct request_sock *req,
> unsigned long timeout)
> {
> req->num_retrans = 0;
> @@ -759,19 +759,27 @@ static void reqsk_queue_hash_req(struct request_sock *req,
> timer_setup(&req->rsk_timer, reqsk_timer_handler, TIMER_PINNED);
> mod_timer(&req->rsk_timer, jiffies + timeout);
>
> - inet_ehash_insert(req_to_sk(req), NULL);
> + if (!inet_ehash_insert(req_to_sk(req), NULL)) {
> + if (timer_pending(&req->rsk_timer))
> + del_timer_sync(&req->rsk_timer);
> + return false;
> + }
> /* before letting lookups find us, make sure all req fields
> * are committed to memory and refcnt initialized.
> */
> smp_wmb();
> refcount_set(&req->rsk_refcnt, 2 + 1);
> + return true;
> }
>
> -void inet_csk_reqsk_queue_hash_add(struct sock *sk, struct request_sock *req,
> +bool inet_csk_reqsk_queue_hash_add(struct sock *sk, struct request_sock *req,
> unsigned long timeout)
> {
> - reqsk_queue_hash_req(req, timeout);
> + if (!reqsk_queue_hash_req(req, timeout))
> + return false;
> +
> inet_csk_reqsk_queue_added(sk);
> + return true;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inet_csk_reqsk_queue_hash_add);
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> index c4503073248b..b6a1b5334565 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> @@ -477,6 +477,7 @@ bool inet_ehash_insert(struct sock *sk, struct sock *osk)
> struct inet_ehash_bucket *head;
> spinlock_t *lock;
> bool ret = true;
> + struct sock *reqsk = NULL;
>
> WARN_ON_ONCE(!sk_unhashed(sk));
>
> @@ -486,6 +487,18 @@ bool inet_ehash_insert(struct sock *sk, struct sock *osk)
> lock = inet_ehash_lockp(hashinfo, sk->sk_hash);
>
> spin_lock(lock);
> + if (!osk)
> + reqsk = __inet_lookup_established(sock_net(sk), &tcp_hashinfo,
> + sk->sk_daddr, sk->sk_dport,
> + sk->sk_rcv_saddr, sk->sk_num,
> + sk->sk_bound_dev_if, sk->sk_bound_dev_if);
> + if (unlikely(reqsk)) {

What reqsk would be a SYN_RECV socket, and not a ESTABLISH one (or a
TIME_WAIT ?)

> + ret = false;
> + reqsk_free(inet_reqsk(sk));
> + spin_unlock(lock);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> if (osk) {

This test should have be a hint here : Sometime we _expect_ to have an
old socket (TIMEWAIT) and remove it


> WARN_ON_ONCE(sk->sk_hash != osk->sk_hash);
> ret = sk_nulls_del_node_init_rcu(osk);
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> index 38dfc308c0fb..358272394590 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
> @@ -6570,9 +6570,10 @@ int tcp_conn_request(struct request_sock_ops *rsk_ops,
> sock_put(fastopen_sk);
> } else {
> tcp_rsk(req)->tfo_listener = false;
> - if (!want_cookie)
> - inet_csk_reqsk_queue_hash_add(sk, req,
> - tcp_timeout_init((struct sock *)req));
> + if (!want_cookie && !inet_csk_reqsk_queue_hash_add(sk, req,
> + tcp_timeout_init((struct sock *)req)))
> + return 0;
> +
> af_ops->send_synack(sk, dst, &fl, req, &foc,
> !want_cookie ? TCP_SYNACK_NORMAL :
> TCP_SYNACK_COOKIE);
> --
> 2.20.1
>

I believe the proper fix is more complicated.

Probably we need to move the locking in a less deeper location.

(Also a similar fix would be needed in IPv6)

Thanks.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-06-12 18:30    [W:0.100 / U:2.804 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site