From 6c88b44dcb26b60bb1f93e5c387aa102019ed849 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Chris Caputo <ccaputo@alt.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 16:28:55 +0000
Subject: bgpd: fix bgp_node locking issues

* bgpd: Connected table locks were being locked but not unlocked, such that
  eventually a lock would exceed 2^31 and become negative, thus triggering
  an assert later on.
* bgp_main.c: (bgp_exit) delete connected elements along with ifp's.
* bgp_nexthop.c: (bgp_nexthop_lookup{,_ipv6}) add missing unlocks
  (bgp_multiaccess_check_v4) ditto
  (bgp_connected_{add,delete}) Use a distinct memtype for bgp_connected_ref.
  (bgp_scan_finish) reset the nexthop cache to clean it up when bgpd exits
* bgp_route.c: fix missing bgp_node unlocks
* lib/memtype.c: (memory_list_bgp) add MTYPE_BGP_CONN
* testing: has been tested for almost 2 months now.
---
 bgpd/bgp_nexthop.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

(limited to 'bgpd/bgp_nexthop.c')

diff --git a/bgpd/bgp_nexthop.c b/bgpd/bgp_nexthop.c
index 0cde665e..719cb966 100644
--- a/bgpd/bgp_nexthop.c
+++ b/bgpd/bgp_nexthop.c
@@ -276,6 +276,8 @@ bgp_nexthop_lookup_ipv6 (struct peer *peer, struct bgp_info *ri, int *changed,
 
 		  if (bnc->metric != oldbnc->metric)
 		    bnc->metricchanged = 1;
+
+                  bgp_unlock_node (oldrn);
 		}
 	    }
 	}
@@ -365,6 +367,8 @@ bgp_nexthop_lookup (afi_t afi, struct peer *peer, struct bgp_info *ri,
 
 		  if (bnc->metric != oldbnc->metric)
 		    bnc->metricchanged = 1;
+
+                  bgp_unlock_node (oldrn);
 		}
 	    }
 	}
@@ -571,7 +575,7 @@ bgp_connected_add (struct connected *ifc)
 	}
       else
 	{
-	  bc = XCALLOC (0, sizeof (struct bgp_connected_ref));
+	  bc = XCALLOC (MTYPE_BGP_CONN, sizeof (struct bgp_connected_ref));
 	  bc->refcnt = 1;
 	  rn->info = bc;
 	}
@@ -596,7 +600,7 @@ bgp_connected_add (struct connected *ifc)
 	}
       else
 	{
-	  bc = XCALLOC (0, sizeof (struct bgp_connected_ref));
+	  bc = XCALLOC (MTYPE_BGP_CONN, sizeof (struct bgp_connected_ref));
 	  bc->refcnt = 1;
 	  rn->info = bc;
 	}
@@ -636,7 +640,7 @@ bgp_connected_delete (struct connected *ifc)
       bc->refcnt--;
       if (bc->refcnt == 0)
 	{
-	  XFREE (0, bc);
+	  XFREE (MTYPE_BGP_CONN, bc);
 	  rn->info = NULL;
 	}
       bgp_unlock_node (rn);
@@ -662,7 +666,7 @@ bgp_connected_delete (struct connected *ifc)
       bc->refcnt--;
       if (bc->refcnt == 0)
 	{
-	  XFREE (0, bc);
+	  XFREE (MTYPE_BGP_CONN, bc);
 	  rn->info = NULL;
 	}
       bgp_unlock_node (rn);
@@ -1136,11 +1140,15 @@ bgp_multiaccess_check_v4 (struct in_addr nexthop, char *peer)
   rn1 = bgp_node_match (bgp_connected_table[AFI_IP], &p1);
   if (! rn1)
     return 0;
+  bgp_unlock_node (rn1);
   
   rn2 = bgp_node_match (bgp_connected_table[AFI_IP], &p2);
   if (! rn2)
     return 0;
+  bgp_unlock_node (rn2);
 
+  /* This is safe, even with above unlocks, since we are just
+     comparing pointers to the objects, not the objects themselves. */
   if (rn1 == rn2)
     return 1;
 
@@ -1316,6 +1324,9 @@ bgp_scan_init (void)
 void
 bgp_scan_finish (void)
 {
+  /* Only the current one needs to be reset. */
+  bgp_nexthop_cache_reset (bgp_nexthop_cache_table[AFI_IP]);
+
   bgp_table_unlock (cache1_table[AFI_IP]);
   cache1_table[AFI_IP] = NULL;
 
@@ -1326,6 +1337,9 @@ bgp_scan_finish (void)
   bgp_connected_table[AFI_IP] = NULL;
 
 #ifdef HAVE_IPV6
+  /* Only the current one needs to be reset. */
+  bgp_nexthop_cache_reset (bgp_nexthop_cache_table[AFI_IP6]);
+
   bgp_table_unlock (cache1_table[AFI_IP6]);
   cache1_table[AFI_IP6] = NULL;
 
-- 
cgit v1.2.1