Re: [PATCH v2] virtio-rng: return available data with O_NONBLOCK

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 03:32:55PM +0200, mwilck@suse.com wrote:
> From: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>
> 
> If a program opens /dev/hwrng with O_NONBLOCK and uses poll() and
> non-blocking read() to retrieve random data, it ends up in a tight
> loop with poll() always returning POLLIN and read() returning EAGAIN.
> This repeats forever until some process makes a blocking read() call.
> The reason is that virtio_read() always returns 0 in non-blocking mode,
> even if data is available. Worse, it fetches random data from the
> hypervisor after every non-blocking call, without ever using this data.
> 
> The following test program illustrates the behavior and can be used
> for testing and experiments. The problem will only be seen if all
> tasks use non-blocking access; otherwise the blocking reads will
> "recharge" the random pool and cause other, non-blocking reads to
> succeed at least sometimes.
> 
> /* Whether to use non-blocking mode in a task, problem occurs if CONDITION is 
> 1 */
> //#define CONDITION (getpid() % 2 != 0)
> 
> static volatile sig_atomic_t stop;
> static void handler(int sig __attribute__((unused))) { stop = 1; }
> 
> static void loop(int fd, int sec)
> {
>       struct pollfd pfd = { .fd = fd, .events  = POLLIN, };
>       unsigned long errors = 0, eagains = 0, bytes = 0, succ = 0;
>       int size, rc, rd;
> 
>       srandom(getpid());
>       if (CONDITION && fcntl(fd, F_SETFL, fcntl(fd, F_GETFL) | O_NONBLOCK) == 
> -1)
>               perror("fcntl");
>       size = MINBUFSIZ + random() % (MAXBUFSIZ - MINBUFSIZ + 1);
> 
>       for(;;) {
>               char buf[size];
> 
>               if (stop)
>                       break;
>               rc = poll(&pfd, 1, sec);
>               if (rc > 0) {
>                       rd = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
>                       if (rd == -1 && errno == EAGAIN)
>                               eagains++;
>                       else if (rd == -1)
>                               errors++;
>                       else {
>                               succ++;
>                               bytes += rd;
>                               write(1, buf, sizeof(buf));
>                       }
>               } else if (rc == -1) {
>                       if (errno != EINTR)
>                               perror("poll");
>                       break;
>               } else
>                       fprintf(stderr, "poll: timeout\n");
>       }
>       fprintf(stderr,
>               "pid %d %sblocking, bufsize %d, %d seconds, %lu bytes read, %lu 
> success, %lu eagain, %lu errors\n",
>               getpid(), CONDITION ? "non-" : "", size, sec, bytes, succ, 
> eagains, errors);
> }
> 
> int main(void)
> {
>       int fd;
> 
>       fork(); fork();
>       fd = open("/dev/hwrng", O_RDONLY);
>       if (fd == -1) {
>               perror("open");
>               return 1;
>       };
>       signal(SIGALRM, handler);
>       alarm(SECONDS);
>       loop(fd, SECONDS);
>       close(fd);
>       wait(NULL);
>       return 0;
> }
> 
> void loop(int fd)
> {
>         struct pollfd pfd0 = { .fd = fd, .events  = POLLIN, };
>         int rc;
>         unsigned int n;
> 
>         for (n = LOOPS; n > 0; n--) {
>                 struct pollfd pfd = pfd0;
>                 char buf[SIZE];
> 
>                 rc = poll(&pfd, 1, 1);
>                 if (rc > 0) {
>                         int rd = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));
> 
>                         if (rd == -1)
>                                 perror("read");
>                         else
>                                 printf("read %d bytes\n", rd);
>                 } else if (rc == -1)
>                         perror("poll");
>                 else
>                         fprintf(stderr, "timeout\n");
> 
>         }
> }
> 
> int main(void)
> {
>         int fd;
> 
>         fd = open("/dev/hwrng", O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK);
>         if (fd == -1) {
>                 perror("open");
>                 return 1;
>         };
>         loop(fd);
>         close(fd);
>         return 0;
> }
> 
> This can be observed in the real word e.g. with nested qemu/KVM virtual
> machines, if both the "outer" and "inner" VMs have a virtio-rng device.
> If the "inner" VM requests random data, qemu running in the "outer" VM
> uses this device in a non-blocking manner like the test program above.
> 
> Fix it by returning available data if a previous hypervisor call has
> completed in the meantime. I tested the patch with the program above,
> and with rng-tools.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>
> ---
>  drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c 
> b/drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c
> index 79a6e47b5fbc..984713b35892 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c
> @@ -59,6 +59,20 @@ static int virtio_read(struct hwrng *rng, void *buf, 
> size_t size, bool wait)
>       if (vi->hwrng_removed)
>               return -ENODEV;
>  
> +     /*
> +      * If the previous call was non-blocking, we may have got some
> +      * randomness already.
> +      */
> +     if (vi->busy && completion_done(&vi->have_data)) {
> +             unsigned int len;
> +
> +             vi->busy = false;
> +             len = vi->data_avail > size ? size : vi->data_avail;
> +             vi->data_avail -= len;

I wonder what purpose does this line serve: busy is false
which basically means data_avail is invalid, right?
A following non blocking call will not enter here.

> +             if (len)
> +                     return len;
> +     }
> +
>       if (!vi->busy) {
>               vi->busy = true;
>               reinit_completion(&vi->have_data);

> -- 
> 2.26.2