linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.6 12/31] neigh: Explicitly declare RCU-bh read side critical section in neigh

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed,  6 Jul 2016 18:19:02 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, David Barroso <dbarroso@...tly.com>,
	Lennert Buytenhek <lbuytenhek@...tly.com>,
	David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Robert Shearman <rshearma@...cade.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH 4.6 12/31] neigh: Explicitly declare RCU-bh read side critical section in neigh_xmit()

4.6-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: David Barroso <dbarroso@...tly.com>

[ Upstream commit b560f03ddfb072bca65e9440ff0dc4f9b1d1f056 ]

neigh_xmit() expects to be called inside an RCU-bh read side critical
section, and while one of its two current callers gets this right, the
other one doesn't.

More specifically, neigh_xmit() has two callers, mpls_forward() and
mpls_output(), and while both callers call neigh_xmit() under
rcu_read_lock(), this provides sufficient protection for neigh_xmit()
only in the case of mpls_forward(), as that is always called from
softirq context and therefore doesn't need explicit BH protection,
while mpls_output() can be called from process context with softirqs
enabled.

When mpls_output() is called from process context, with softirqs
enabled, we can be preempted by a softirq at any time, and RCU-bh
considers the completion of a softirq as signaling the end of any
pending read-side critical sections, so if we do get a softirq
while we are in the part of neigh_xmit() that expects to be run inside
an RCU-bh read side critical section, we can end up with an unexpected
RCU grace period running right in the middle of that critical section,
making things go boom.

This patch fixes this impedance mismatch in the callee, by making
neigh_xmit() always take rcu_read_{,un}lock_bh() around the code that
expects to be treated as an RCU-bh read side critical section, as this
seems a safer option than fixing it in the callers.

Fixes: 4fd3d7d9e868f ("neigh: Add helper function neigh_xmit")
Signed-off-by: David Barroso <dbarroso@...tly.com>
Signed-off-by: Lennert Buytenhek <lbuytenhek@...tly.com>
Acked-by: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Acked-by: Robert Shearman <rshearma@...cade.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 net/core/neighbour.c |    6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/net/core/neighbour.c
+++ b/net/core/neighbour.c
@@ -2467,13 +2467,17 @@ int neigh_xmit(int index, struct net_dev
 		tbl = neigh_tables[index];
 		if (!tbl)
 			goto out;
+		rcu_read_lock_bh();
 		neigh = __neigh_lookup_noref(tbl, addr, dev);
 		if (!neigh)
 			neigh = __neigh_create(tbl, addr, dev, false);
 		err = PTR_ERR(neigh);
-		if (IS_ERR(neigh))
+		if (IS_ERR(neigh)) {
+			rcu_read_unlock_bh();
 			goto out_kfree_skb;
+		}
 		err = neigh->output(neigh, skb);
+		rcu_read_unlock_bh();
 	}
 	else if (index == NEIGH_LINK_TABLE) {
 		err = dev_hard_header(skb, dev, ntohs(skb->protocol),