Re: a problem tcp_v4_err()

[Eric Dumazet]

Le vendredi 12 novembre 2010 Ã 19:12 +0100, Eric Dumazet a Ãcrit :
> Le vendredi 12 novembre 2010 Ã 20:57 +0300, Alexey Kuznetsov a Ãcrit :
> > Hello!
> > 
> > I looked at tcp_v4_err() and found something strange. Quite non-trivial operations
> > are performed on unlocked sockets. It looks like at least this BUG_ON():
> > 
> >                 skb = tcp_write_queue_head(sk);
> >                 BUG_ON(!skb);
> > 
> > can be easily triggered.
> > 
> > Do I miss something?
> > 
> 
> Hi Alexey !
> 
> I see socket is locked around line 368,
> 
>         bh_lock_sock(sk);
>         /* If too many ICMPs get dropped on busy
>          * servers this needs to be solved differently.
>          */
>         if (sock_owned_by_user(sk))
>                 NET_INC_STATS_BH(net, LINUX_MIB_LOCKDROPPEDICMPS);
> 
> 
> Hmm, maybe some goto is missing ;)
> 

Well, goto is not missing.

Why do you think BUG_ON(!skb) can be triggered ?

We test before :

	if (seq != tp->snd_una  || !icsk->icsk_retransmits ||
		!icsk->icsk_backoff)
		break;

So a concurrent user only can add new skb(s) in the (non empty) queue ?



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/