netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/7] fix hnode refcounting

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 6 Sep 2018 06:21:09 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] fix hnode refcounting

On 2018-09-05 3:04 p.m., Al Viro wrote:
> From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> 
> cls_u32.c misuses refcounts for struct tc_u_hnode - it counts references via
> ->hlist and via ->tp_root together.  u32_destroy() drops the former and, in
> case when there had been links, leaves the sucker on the list.  As the result,
> there's nothing to protect it from getting freed once links are dropped.
> That also makes the "is it busy" check incapable of catching the root hnode -
> it *is* busy (there's a reference from tp), but we don't see it as something
> separate.  "Is it our root?" check partially covers that, but the problem
> exists for others' roots as well.
> 
> AFAICS, the minimal fix preserving the existing behaviour (where it doesn't
> include oopsen, that is) would be this:
>          * count tp->root and tp_c->hlist as separate references.  I.e.
> have u32_init() set refcount to 2, not 1.
> 	* in u32_destroy() we always drop the former; in u32_destroy_hnode() -
> the latter.
> 
> 	That way we have *all* references contributing to refcount.  List
> removal happens in u32_destroy_hnode() (called only when ->refcnt is 1)
> an in u32_destroy() in case of tc_u_common going away, along with everything
> reachable from it.  IOW, that way we know that u32_destroy_key() won't
> free something still on the list (or pointed to by someone's ->root).
> 
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>

For networking patches, subject should be reflective of tree and
subsystem. Example for this one:
"[PATCH net 1/7]:net: sched: cls_u32: fix hnode refcounting"
Also useful to have a cover letter summarizing the patchset
in 0/7. Otherwise

Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>

cheers,
jamal