ethdev: fix secondary process change share memory
Checks
Commit Message
Hi all,I am from Sangfor Tech.I found a bug when using DPDK in
multiprocess scenario.The secondary process enters
"rte_eth_dev_pci_copy_info" function when initializing.Then it
sets the value of struct "rte_eth_dev_data.dev_flags" to zero,
but this struct is shared by primary process and secondary
process, and the value change is unexpected by primary process.
This may cause very serious damage.I think
the secondary process should not enter "rte_eth_dev_pci_copy_info"
function or changes the value of struct "rte_eth_dev_data.dev_flags"
in shared memory.
I fixed this bug by adding an if-statement to forbid the secondary
process changing the above-mentioned value.
Thansk, All.
Signed-off-by: Fang TongHao <fangtonghao@sangfor.com.cn>
---
lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h | 19 ++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
Comments
hi, tonghao
On 1/9/2020 8:27 PM, Fang TongHao wrote:
> Hi all,I am from Sangfor Tech.I found a bug when using DPDK in
> multiprocess scenario.The secondary process enters
> "rte_eth_dev_pci_copy_info" function when initializing.Then it
> sets the value of struct "rte_eth_dev_data.dev_flags" to zero,
> but this struct is shared by primary process and secondary
> process, and the value change is unexpected by primary process.
> This may cause very serious damage.I think
> the secondary process should not enter "rte_eth_dev_pci_copy_info"
> function or changes the value of struct "rte_eth_dev_data.dev_flags"
> in shared memory.
> I fixed this bug by adding an if-statement to forbid the secondary
> process changing the above-mentioned value.
> Thansk, All.
i think the format of commit log should be refined to be more formal
like as below. what do you think?
ethdev: XXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
> Signed-off-by: Fang TongHao <fangtonghao@sangfor.com.cn>
if it is a fix, suggest to add the line as "Fixes: XXXXXXXX ("ethdev:
XXXXXXX") to trace it.
> ---
> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h | 19 ++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
> index ccdbb46ec..916de8a14 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
> @@ -59,15 +59,16 @@ rte_eth_copy_pci_info(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev,
> }
>
> eth_dev->intr_handle = &pci_dev->intr_handle;
> -
> - eth_dev->data->dev_flags = 0;
> - if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_LSC)
> - eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_LSC;
> - if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_RMV)
> - eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_RMV;
> -
> - eth_dev->data->kdrv = pci_dev->kdrv;
> - eth_dev->data->numa_node = pci_dev->device.numa_node;
> + if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
> + eth_dev->data->dev_flags = 0;
> + if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_LSC)
> + eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_LSC;
> + if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_RMV)
> + eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_RMV;
> +
> + eth_dev->data->kdrv = pci_dev->kdrv;
> + eth_dev->data->numa_node = pci_dev->device.numa_node;
From the change log, you said that "rte_eth_dev_data.dev_flags" should
not be touched by secondary process, but you don't mention about
data->kdrv and data->numa_node, could you also explain them in the log
if they need to process as the same.
> + }
> }
>
> static inline int
thanks for your correction
I will rewrite my commit log and send email again
方统浩50450
邮箱:fangtonghao@sangfor.com.cn
签名由 网易邮箱大师 定制
On 01/10/2020 15:30, Jeff Guo wrote:
hi, tonghao
On 1/9/2020 8:27 PM, Fang TongHao wrote:
> Hi all,I am from Sangfor Tech.I found a bug when using DPDK in
> multiprocess scenario.The secondary process enters
> "rte_eth_dev_pci_copy_info" function when initializing.Then it
> sets the value of struct "rte_eth_dev_data.dev_flags" to zero,
> but this struct is shared by primary process and secondary
> process, and the value change is unexpected by primary process.
> This may cause very serious damage.I think
> the secondary process should not enter "rte_eth_dev_pci_copy_info"
> function or changes the value of struct "rte_eth_dev_data.dev_flags"
> in shared memory.
> I fixed this bug by adding an if-statement to forbid the secondary
> process changing the above-mentioned value.
> Thansk, All.
i think the format of commit log should be refined to be more formal
like as below. what do you think?
ethdev: XXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
> Signed-off-by: Fang TongHao <fangtonghao@sangfor.com.cn>
if it is a fix, suggest to add the line as "Fixes: XXXXXXXX ("ethdev:
XXXXXXX") to trace it.
> ---
> lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h | 19 ++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
> index ccdbb46ec..916de8a14 100644
> --- a/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
> +++ b/lib/librte_ethdev/rte_ethdev_pci.h
> @@ -59,15 +59,16 @@ rte_eth_copy_pci_info(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev,
> }
>
> eth_dev->intr_handle = &pci_dev->intr_handle;
> -
> - eth_dev->data->dev_flags = 0;
> - if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_LSC)
> - eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_LSC;
> - if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_RMV)
> - eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_RMV;
> -
> - eth_dev->data->kdrv = pci_dev->kdrv;
> - eth_dev->data->numa_node = pci_dev->device.numa_node;
> + if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
> + eth_dev->data->dev_flags = 0;
> + if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_LSC)
> + eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_LSC;
> + if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_RMV)
> + eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_RMV;
> +
> + eth_dev->data->kdrv = pci_dev->kdrv;
> + eth_dev->data->numa_node = pci_dev->device.numa_node;
From the change log, you said that "rte_eth_dev_data.dev_flags" should
not be touched by secondary process, but you don't mention about
data->kdrv and data->numa_node, could you also explain them in the log
if they need to process as the same.
> + }
> }
>
> static inline int
@@ -59,15 +59,16 @@ rte_eth_copy_pci_info(struct rte_eth_dev *eth_dev,
}
eth_dev->intr_handle = &pci_dev->intr_handle;
-
- eth_dev->data->dev_flags = 0;
- if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_LSC)
- eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_LSC;
- if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_RMV)
- eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_RMV;
-
- eth_dev->data->kdrv = pci_dev->kdrv;
- eth_dev->data->numa_node = pci_dev->device.numa_node;
+ if (rte_eal_process_type() == RTE_PROC_PRIMARY) {
+ eth_dev->data->dev_flags = 0;
+ if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_LSC)
+ eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_LSC;
+ if (pci_dev->driver->drv_flags & RTE_PCI_DRV_INTR_RMV)
+ eth_dev->data->dev_flags |= RTE_ETH_DEV_INTR_RMV;
+
+ eth_dev->data->kdrv = pci_dev->kdrv;
+ eth_dev->data->numa_node = pci_dev->device.numa_node;
+ }
}
static inline int