From: Jordan Whited <jordan@tailscale.com>
To: lsc <lsc@lv6.tw>
Cc: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com, james@tailscale.com, Jason@zx2c4.com
Subject: Re: wireguard-go: data race introduced in recent commit 9e2f386
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 10:00:19 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABprzAaZC86FosOK7A__LB7LzULLYv=-y539y5VHacttYJwSmg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ac87f86f-6837-4e0e-ec34-1df35f52540e@lv6.tw>
SC, thank you for reporting. Do you happen to have a stack trace from
one of the panics?
On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 2:01 AM lsc <lsc@lv6.tw> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Not sure if this is the correct place for bug reports, hope it's okay :)
>
> I found my wireguard-go server (built from current ToT 1417a47) always
> panicking when I ran speedtest on a client via the server. I rebuilt the
> server with data race detector (`go build -race`) and got the following
> trace:
>
> ==================
> WARNING: DATA RACE
> Read at 0x00c00043b2f8 by goroutine 49:
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/conn.setSrcControl()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/conn/sticky_linux.go:76 +0x8c
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/conn.(*StdNetBind).send4()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/conn/bind_std.go:346 +0x174
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/conn.(*StdNetBind).Send()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/conn/bind_std.go:332 +0x1d4
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Peer).SendBuffers()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/peer.go:126 +0x18c
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Peer).RoutineSequentialSender()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/send.go:519 +0x458
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Peer).Start.func2()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/peer.go:198 +0x40
>
> Previous write at 0x00c00043b2f8 by goroutine 47:
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/conn.(*StdNetEndpoint).ClearSrc()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/conn/bind_std.go:100 +0x48
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/conn.getSrcFromControl()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/conn/sticky_linux.go:18 +0x3c
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/conn.(*StdNetBind).makeReceiveIPv4.func1()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/conn/bind_std.go:232 +0x350
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Device).RoutineReceiveIncoming()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/receive.go:107 +0x3ac
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Device).BindUpdate.func3()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/device.go:530 +0x4c
>
> Goroutine 49 (running) created at:
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Peer).Start()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/peer.go:198 +0x300
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*ipcSetPeer).handlePostConfig()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/uapi.go:268 +0x164
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Device).IpcSetOperation()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/uapi.go:160 +0x35c
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Device).IpcHandle()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/uapi.go:428 +0x248
> main.main.func4.1()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/main.go:245 +0x4c
>
> Goroutine 47 (running) created at:
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Device).BindUpdate()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/device.go:530 +0x4b8
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Device).handleDeviceLine()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/uapi.go:223 +0x45c
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Device).IpcSetOperation()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/uapi.go:183 +0x210
> golang.zx2c4.com/wireguard/device.(*Device).IpcHandle()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/device/uapi.go:428 +0x248
> main.main.func4.1()
> /home/lsc36/wireguard-go/main.go:245 +0x4c
> ==================
>
> The bug looks introduced by a recent commit 9e2f386 "conn, device, tun:
> implement vectorized I/O on Linux". Without much knowledge to the
> codebase, it seems to me that Endpoint is supposed to be guarded by the
> RWMutex embedded in Peer, yet the change introduced a write without
> locking the mutex (`ep.ClearSrc()` called from sticky_linux.go:18).
>
> In addition, I found it weird that Endpoint objects are reused via
> `endpointPool`. The docstring suggests "Endpoints are immutable, so we
> can re-use them" but that doesn't seem true.
>
> Added authors/reviewers of 9e2f386 to cc. Would you take a look?
>
> Regards,
> SC
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-23 17:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-23 9:01 lsc
2023-03-23 17:00 ` Jordan Whited [this message]
2023-03-24 3:21 ` lsc
2023-03-24 13:44 ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2023-03-24 13:45 ` [PATCH wireguard-go] conn: fix StdNetEndpoint data race by dynamically allocating endpoints Jason A. Donenfeld
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CABprzAaZC86FosOK7A__LB7LzULLYv=-y539y5VHacttYJwSmg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jordan@tailscale.com \
--cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
--cc=james@tailscale.com \
--cc=lsc@lv6.tw \
--cc=wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).