From: Yun Lu When MSG_DONTWAIT is not set, the tpacket_snd operation will wait for pending_refcnt to decrement to zero before returning. The pending_refcnt is decremented by 1 when the skb->destructor function is called, indicating that the skb has been successfully sent and needs to be destroyed. If an error occurs during this process, the tpacket_snd() function will exit and return error, but pending_refcnt may not yet have decremented to zero. Assuming the next send operation is executed immediately, but there are no available frames to be sent in tx_ring (i.e., packet_current_frame returns NULL), and skb is also NULL, the function will not execute wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout() to yield the CPU. Instead, it will enter a do-while loop, waiting for pending_refcnt to be zero. Even if the previous skb has completed transmission, the skb->destructor function can only be invoked in the ksoftirqd thread (assuming NAPI threading is enabled). When both the ksoftirqd thread and the tpacket_snd operation happen to run on the same CPU, and the CPU trapped in the do-while loop without yielding, the ksoftirqd thread will not get scheduled to run. As a result, pending_refcnt will never be reduced to zero, and the do-while loop cannot exit, eventually leading to a CPU soft lockup issue. In fact, skb is true for all but the first iterations of that loop, and as long as pending_refcnt is not zero, even if incremented by a previous call, wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout() should be executed to yield the CPU, allowing the ksoftirqd thread to be scheduled. Therefore, the execution condition of this function should be modified to check if pending_refcnt is not zero, instead of check skb. - if (need_wait && skb) { + if (need_wait && packet_read_pending(&po->tx_ring)) { As a result, the judgment conditions are duplicated with the end code of the while loop, and packet_read_pending() is a very expensive function. Actually, this loop can only exit when ph is NULL, so the loop condition can be changed to while (1), and in the "ph = NULL" branch, if the subsequent condition of if is not met, the loop can break directly. Now, the loop logic remains the same as origin but is clearer and more obvious. Fixes: 89ed5b519004 ("af_packet: Block execution of tasks waiting for transmit to complete in AF_PACKET") Cc: stable@kernel.org Suggested-by: LongJun Tang Signed-off-by: Yun Lu --- Changes in v5: - Still combine fix and optimization together, change to while(1). Thanks: Willem de Bruijn. - Link to v4: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250710102639.280932-3-luyun_611@163.com/ Changes in v4: - Split to the fix alone. Thanks: Willem de Bruijn. - Link to v3: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250709095653.62469-3-luyun_611@163.com/ Changes in v3: - Simplify the code and reuse ph to continue. Thanks: Eric Dumazet. - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250708020642.27838-1-luyun_611@163.com/ Changes in v2: - Add a Fixes tag. - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250707081629.10344-1-luyun_611@163.com/ --- --- net/packet/af_packet.c | 23 +++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c index 7089b8c2a655..be608f07441f 100644 --- a/net/packet/af_packet.c +++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c @@ -2846,15 +2846,21 @@ static int tpacket_snd(struct packet_sock *po, struct msghdr *msg) ph = packet_current_frame(po, &po->tx_ring, TP_STATUS_SEND_REQUEST); if (unlikely(ph == NULL)) { - if (need_wait && skb) { + /* Note: packet_read_pending() might be slow if we + * have to call it as it's per_cpu variable, but in + * fast-path we don't have to call it, only when ph + * is NULL, we need to check the pending_refcnt. + */ + if (need_wait && packet_read_pending(&po->tx_ring)) { timeo = wait_for_completion_interruptible_timeout(&po->skb_completion, timeo); if (timeo <= 0) { err = !timeo ? -ETIMEDOUT : -ERESTARTSYS; goto out_put; } - } - /* check for additional frames */ - continue; + /* check for additional frames */ + continue; + } else + break; } skb = NULL; @@ -2943,14 +2949,7 @@ static int tpacket_snd(struct packet_sock *po, struct msghdr *msg) } packet_increment_head(&po->tx_ring); len_sum += tp_len; - } while (likely((ph != NULL) || - /* Note: packet_read_pending() might be slow if we have - * to call it as it's per_cpu variable, but in fast-path - * we already short-circuit the loop with the first - * condition, and luckily don't have to go that path - * anyway. - */ - (need_wait && packet_read_pending(&po->tx_ring)))); + } while (1); err = len_sum; goto out_put; -- 2.43.0