linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usbnet: Fix two races between usbnet

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]

Message-ID: <877fore9yn.fsf@nemi.mork.no>
Date:	Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:31:12 +0200
From:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
To:	Eugene Shatokhin <eugene.shatokhin@...alab.ru>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, oneukum@...e.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usbnet: Fix two races between usbnet_stop() and the BH

Eugene Shatokhin <eugene.shatokhin@...alab.ru> writes:

> The problem is not in the reordering but rather in the fact that
> "dev->flags = 0" is not necessarily atomic
> w.r.t. "clear_bit(EVENT_RX_KILL, &dev->flags)", and vice versa.
>
> So the following might be possible, although unlikely:
>
> CPU0             CPU1
>                  clear_bit: read dev->flags
>                  clear_bit: clear EVENT_RX_KILL in the read value
>
> dev->flags=0;
>
>                  clear_bit: write updated dev->flags
>
> As a result, dev->flags may become non-zero again.

Ah, right.  Thanks for explaining.

> I cannot prove yet that this is an impossible situation. If anyone
> can, please explain. If so, this part of the patch will not be needed.

I wonder if we could simply move the dev->flags = 0 down a few lines to
fix both issues?  It doesn't seem to do anything useful except for
resetting the flags to a sane initial state after the device is down.

Stopping the tasklet rescheduling etc depends only on netif_running(),
which will be false when usbnet_stop is called.  There is no need to
touch dev->flags for this to happen.

>> The EVENT_NO_RUNTIME_PM bug should definitely be fixed.  Please split
>> that out as a separate fix.  It's a separate issue, and should be
>> backported to all maintained stable releases it applies to (anything
>> from v3.8 and newer)
>
> Yes, that makes sense. However, this fix was originally provided by
> Oliver Neukum rather than me, so I would like to hear his opinion as
> well first.

If what I write above is correct (please help me verify...), then maybe
it does make sense to do these together anyway.



Bjørn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/