rxrpc: Make service call handling more robust
Make the following changes to improve the robustness of the code that sets up a new service call: (1) Cache the rxrpc_sock struct obtained in rxrpc_data_ready() to do a service ID check and pass that along to rxrpc_new_incoming_call(). This means that I can remove the check from rxrpc_new_incoming_call() without the need to worry about the socket attached to the local endpoint getting replaced - which would invalidate the check. (2) Cache the rxrpc_peer struct, thereby allowing the peer search to be done once. The peer is passed to rxrpc_new_incoming_call(), thereby saving the need to repeat the search. This also reduces the possibility of rxrpc_publish_service_conn() BUG()'ing due to the detection of a duplicate connection, despite the initial search done by rxrpc_find_connection_rcu() having turned up nothing. This BUG() shouldn't ever get hit since rxrpc_data_ready() *should* be non-reentrant and the result of the initial search should still hold true, but it has proven possible to hit. I *think* this may be due to __rxrpc_lookup_peer_rcu() cutting short the iteration over the hash table if it finds a matching peer with a zero usage count, but I don't know for sure since it's only ever been hit once that I know of. Another possibility is that a bug in rxrpc_data_ready() that checked the wrong byte in the header for the RXRPC_CLIENT_INITIATED flag might've let through a packet that caused a spurious and invalid call to be set up. That is addressed in another patch. (3) Fix __rxrpc_lookup_peer_rcu() to skip peer records that have a zero usage count rather than stopping and returning not found, just in case there's another peer record behind it in the bucket. (4) Don't search the peer records in rxrpc_alloc_incoming_call(), but rather either use the peer cached in (2) or, if one wasn't found, preemptively install a new one. Fixes: 8496af50 ("rxrpc: Use RCU to access a peer's service connection tree") Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment