net/af_xdp: fix resources leak when xsk configure fails
Checks
Commit Message
In xdp_umem_configure() allocated some resources for the
xsk umem, we should delete them when xsk configure fails,
otherwise it will lead to resources leak.
Fixes: f1debd77efaf ("net/af_xdp: introduce AF_XDP PMD")
Cc: stable@dpdk.org
Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
---
drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Comments
On 22/02/2024 03:07, Yunjian Wang wrote:
> In xdp_umem_configure() allocated some resources for the
> xsk umem, we should delete them when xsk configure fails,
> otherwise it will lead to resources leak.
>
> Fixes: f1debd77efaf ("net/af_xdp: introduce AF_XDP PMD")
> Cc:stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang<wangyunjian@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> index 2d151e45c7..8b8b2cff9f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> @@ -1723,8 +1723,10 @@ xsk_configure(struct pmd_internals *internals, struct pkt_rx_queue *rxq,
> out_xsk:
> xsk_socket__delete(rxq->xsk);
> out_umem:
> - if (__atomic_fetch_sub(&rxq->umem->refcnt, 1, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) - 1 == 0)
> + if (__atomic_fetch_sub(&rxq->umem->refcnt, 1, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) - 1 == 0) {
> + (void)xsk_umem__delete(rxq->umem->umem);
> xdp_umem_destroy(rxq->umem);
> + }
>
> return ret;
> }
Does it make sense to: move `xsk_umem__delete()` inside `xdp_umem_destroy()` to be invoked after a NULL check for `umem->umem`
and then fixup the places where both functions are called to only invoke `xdp_umem_destroy()`? (Keeping all the umem cleanup code
in one place)
@Yunjian WDYT?
@Ciara WDYT?
>
> On 22/02/2024 03:07, Yunjian Wang wrote:
> In xdp_umem_configure() allocated some resources for the
> xsk umem, we should delete them when xsk configure fails,
> otherwise it will lead to resources leak.
>
> Fixes: f1debd77efaf ("net/af_xdp: introduce AF_XDP PMD")
> Cc: mailto:stable@dpdk.org
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang mailto:wangyunjian@huawei.com
> ---
> drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> index 2d151e45c7..8b8b2cff9f 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> @@ -1723,8 +1723,10 @@ xsk_configure(struct pmd_internals *internals,
> struct pkt_rx_queue *rxq,
> out_xsk:
> xsk_socket__delete(rxq->xsk);
> out_umem:
> - if (__atomic_fetch_sub(&rxq->umem->refcnt, 1,
> __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) - 1 == 0)
> + if (__atomic_fetch_sub(&rxq->umem->refcnt, 1,
> __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) - 1 == 0) {
> + (void)xsk_umem__delete(rxq->umem->umem);
> xdp_umem_destroy(rxq->umem);
> + }
>
> return ret;
> }
>
> Does it make sense to: move `xsk_umem__delete()` inside
> `xdp_umem_destroy()` to be invoked after a NULL check for `umem->umem`
> and then fixup the places where both functions are called to only invoke
> `xdp_umem_destroy()`? (Keeping all the umem cleanup code
> in one place)
> @Yunjian WDYT?
>
> @Ciara WDYT?
Thanks for the patch Yunjian.
@Maryam +1 for the suggestion I think it would be a good optimisation for the cleanup code.
Thanks,
Ciara
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Loftus, Ciara [mailto:ciara.loftus@intel.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 7:06 PM
> To: Tahhan, Maryam <mtahhan@redhat.com>; wangyunjian
> <wangyunjian@huawei.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; ferruh.yigit@amd.com; stable@dpdk.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] net/af_xdp: fix resources leak when xsk configure fails
>
> >
> > On 22/02/2024 03:07, Yunjian Wang wrote:
> > In xdp_umem_configure() allocated some resources for the xsk umem, we
> > should delete them when xsk configure fails, otherwise it will lead to
> > resources leak.
> >
> > Fixes: f1debd77efaf ("net/af_xdp: introduce AF_XDP PMD")
> > Cc: mailto:stable@dpdk.org
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yunjian Wang mailto:wangyunjian@huawei.com
> > ---
> > drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > index 2d151e45c7..8b8b2cff9f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/af_xdp/rte_eth_af_xdp.c
> > @@ -1723,8 +1723,10 @@ xsk_configure(struct pmd_internals *internals,
> > struct pkt_rx_queue *rxq,
> > out_xsk:
> > xsk_socket__delete(rxq->xsk);
> > out_umem:
> > - if (__atomic_fetch_sub(&rxq->umem->refcnt, 1,
> > __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) - 1 == 0)
> > + if (__atomic_fetch_sub(&rxq->umem->refcnt, 1,
> > __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) - 1 == 0) {
> > + (void)xsk_umem__delete(rxq->umem->umem);
> > xdp_umem_destroy(rxq->umem);
> > + }
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > Does it make sense to: move `xsk_umem__delete()` inside
> > `xdp_umem_destroy()` to be invoked after a NULL check for `umem->umem`
> > and then fixup the places where both functions are called to only
> > invoke `xdp_umem_destroy()`? (Keeping all the umem cleanup code in one
> > place) @Yunjian WDYT?
> >
> > @Ciara WDYT?
>
> Thanks for the patch Yunjian.
>
> @Maryam +1 for the suggestion I think it would be a good optimisation for the
> cleanup code.
OK, I will update it in next version.
>
> Thanks,
> Ciara
>
> >
@@ -1723,8 +1723,10 @@ xsk_configure(struct pmd_internals *internals, struct pkt_rx_queue *rxq,
out_xsk:
xsk_socket__delete(rxq->xsk);
out_umem:
- if (__atomic_fetch_sub(&rxq->umem->refcnt, 1, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) - 1 == 0)
+ if (__atomic_fetch_sub(&rxq->umem->refcnt, 1, __ATOMIC_ACQUIRE) - 1 == 0) {
+ (void)xsk_umem__delete(rxq->umem->umem);
xdp_umem_destroy(rxq->umem);
+ }
return ret;
}