[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170504.095319.42169195176229264.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 09:53:19 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: andreyknvl@...gle.com
Cc: acme@...nel.org, arnaldo.melo@...il.com, dvyukov@...gle.com,
gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk, dccp@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
edumazet@...gle.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
syzkaller@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: net/dccp: dccp_create_openreq_child freed held lock
From: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 15:36:37 +0200
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 4:40 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> <acme@...nel.org> wrote:
>> Em Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 12:35:10PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
>>> Em Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 10:38:54AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov escreveu:
>>> > Hello,
>>> >
>>> > I've got the following report while running syzkaller fuzzer on
>>> > 86292b33d4b79ee03e2f43ea0381ef85f077c760:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > It seems that dccp_create_openreq_child needs to unlock the sock if
>>> > dccp_feat_activate_values fails.
>>>
>>> Yeah, can you please use the patch below, that mimics the error paths in
>>> sk_clone_new(), from where I think even the comment about it being a raw
>>
>> Argh, s/sk_clone_new()/sk_clone_lock()/g
>
> Hi Arnaldo,
>
> Could you send the patch?
>
> We haven't seen these reports since we applied it.
It isn't necessary in the current tree.
Arnaldo created a helper sk_free_unlock_clone() which handles this situation
properly, and calls it from dccp_create_openreq_child().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists