netdev - Re: [Patch net v3 1/4] tcp: fix sock skb accounting in tcp_read

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:   Wed, 24 Aug 2022 10:17:33 +0200
From:   Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
To:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>,
        syzbot+a0e6f8738b58f7654417@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch net v3 1/4] tcp: fix sock skb accounting in tcp_read_skb()

On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 12:54 PM -07, Cong Wang wrote:
> From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>
>
> Before commit 965b57b469a5 ("net: Introduce a new proto_ops
> ->read_skb()"), skb was not dequeued from receive queue hence
> when we close TCP socket skb can be just flushed synchronously.
>
> After this commit, we have to uncharge skb immediately after being
> dequeued, otherwise it is still charged in the original sock. And we
> still need to retain skb->sk, as eBPF programs may extract sock
> information from skb->sk. Therefore, we have to call
> skb_set_owner_sk_safe() here.
>
> Fixes: 965b57b469a5 ("net: Introduce a new proto_ops ->read_skb()")
> Reported-and-tested-by: syzbot+a0e6f8738b58f7654417@...kaller.appspotmail.com
> Tested-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
> Cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
> Cc: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
> Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>
> ---
>  net/ipv4/tcp.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp.c b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> index 970e9a2cca4a..05da5cac080b 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
> @@ -1760,6 +1760,7 @@ int tcp_read_skb(struct sock *sk, skb_read_actor_t recv_actor)
>  		int used;
>  
>  		__skb_unlink(skb, &sk->sk_receive_queue);
> +		WARN_ON(!skb_set_owner_sk_safe(skb, sk));
>  		used = recv_actor(sk, skb);
>  		if (used <= 0) {
>  			if (!copied)

That is a frequent operation.

Don't we want WARN_ON_ONCE like in tcp_read_sock?