Linux Virtualization - Aug 2020 - [PATCH v2] virtio-rng: return available data with O_NONBLOCK

On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 03:32:55PM +0200, mwilck at suse.com
wrote:
> From: Martin Wilck <mwilck at 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 at 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