netdev - Re: [syzbot] [kvm?] [net?] [virt?] general protection fault in virtio_transport_purge

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:   Fri, 24 Mar 2023 10:30:48 +0100
From:   Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To:     Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
Cc:     syzbot <syzbot+befff0a9536049e7902e@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
        Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, stefanha@...hat.com,
        syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        Krasnov Arseniy <oxffffaa@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [syzbot] [kvm?] [net?] [virt?] general protection fault in virtio_transport_purge_skbs

On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 10:10 AM Arseniy Krasnov
<avkrasnov@...rdevices.ru> wrote:
> On 24.03.2023 12:06, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 9:55 AM Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 9:31 AM Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Hi Bobby,
> >>> can you take a look at this report?
> >>>
> >>> It seems related to the changes we made to support skbuff.
> >>
> >> Could it be a problem of concurrent access to pkt_queue ?
> >>
> >> IIUC we should hold pkt_queue.lock when we call skb_queue_splice_init()
> >> and remove pkt_list_lock. (or hold pkt_list_lock when calling
> >> virtio_transport_purge_skbs, but pkt_list_lock seems useless now that
> >> we use skbuff)
> >>
> >
> > In the previous patch was missing a hunk, new one attached:
> >
> > #syz test https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git fff5a5e7f528
> >
> > --- a/net/vmw_vsock/vsock_loopback.c
> > +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/vsock_loopback.c
> > @@ -15,7 +15,6 @@
> >  struct vsock_loopback {
> >         struct workqueue_struct *workqueue;
> >
> > -       spinlock_t pkt_list_lock; /* protects pkt_list */
> >         struct sk_buff_head pkt_queue;
> >         struct work_struct pkt_work;
> >  };
> > @@ -32,9 +31,7 @@ static int vsock_loopback_send_pkt(struct sk_buff *skb)
> >         struct vsock_loopback *vsock = &the_vsock_loopback;
> >         int len = skb->len;
> >
> > -       spin_lock_bh(&vsock->pkt_list_lock);
> >         skb_queue_tail(&vsock->pkt_queue, skb);
> Hello Stefano and Bobby,
>
> Small remark, may be here we can use virtio_vsock_skb_queue_tail() instead of skb_queue_tail().
> skb_queue_tail() disables irqs during spinlock access, while  virtio_vsock_skb_queue_tail()
> uses spin_lock_bh(). vhost and virtio transports use virtio_vsock_skb_queue_tail().
>

Yep, but this shouldn't be related.
I would make this change in a separate patch. ;-)

Thanks,
Stefano