From: Eric Dumazet edumazet@google.com
[ Upstream commit 1e5c647c3f6d4f8497dedcd226204e1880e0ffb3 ]
Add READ_ONCE()/WRITE_ONCE() on accesses to sk->sk_rxhash.
This also prevents a (smart ?) compiler to remove the condition in:
if (sk->sk_rxhash != newval) sk->sk_rxhash = newval;
We need the condition to avoid dirtying a shared cache line.
Fixes: fec5e652e58f ("rfs: Receive Flow Steering") Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet edumazet@google.com Reviewed-by: Simon Horman simon.horman@corigine.com Reviewed-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima kuniyu@amazon.com Signed-off-by: David S. Miller davem@davemloft.net Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin sashal@kernel.org --- include/net/sock.h | 18 +++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h index 3da0601b573ed..51b499d745499 100644 --- a/include/net/sock.h +++ b/include/net/sock.h @@ -1073,8 +1073,12 @@ static inline void sock_rps_record_flow(const struct sock *sk) * OR an additional socket flag * [1] : sk_state and sk_prot are in the same cache line. */ - if (sk->sk_state == TCP_ESTABLISHED) - sock_rps_record_flow_hash(sk->sk_rxhash); + if (sk->sk_state == TCP_ESTABLISHED) { + /* This READ_ONCE() is paired with the WRITE_ONCE() + * from sock_rps_save_rxhash() and sock_rps_reset_rxhash(). + */ + sock_rps_record_flow_hash(READ_ONCE(sk->sk_rxhash)); + } } #endif } @@ -1083,15 +1087,19 @@ static inline void sock_rps_save_rxhash(struct sock *sk, const struct sk_buff *skb) { #ifdef CONFIG_RPS - if (unlikely(sk->sk_rxhash != skb->hash)) - sk->sk_rxhash = skb->hash; + /* The following WRITE_ONCE() is paired with the READ_ONCE() + * here, and another one in sock_rps_record_flow(). + */ + if (unlikely(READ_ONCE(sk->sk_rxhash) != skb->hash)) + WRITE_ONCE(sk->sk_rxhash, skb->hash); #endif }
static inline void sock_rps_reset_rxhash(struct sock *sk) { #ifdef CONFIG_RPS - sk->sk_rxhash = 0; + /* Paired with READ_ONCE() in sock_rps_record_flow() */ + WRITE_ONCE(sk->sk_rxhash, 0); #endif }