linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: rework SIOCGSTAMP ioctl handling

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: <CAF=yD-KCE46P4BniBXM_OgXL8hHwr4U-3hFxXRy70hBkbwY6Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Apr 2019 14:16:29 -0400
From:   Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
        Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
        Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
        Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
        Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>,
        Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>,
        Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>,
        Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
        Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>,
        Andrew Hendry <andrew.hendry@...il.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-hams@...r.kernel.org,
        Bluez mailing list <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, dccp@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-x25@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: rework SIOCGSTAMP ioctl handling

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:19 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 4:46 PM Willem de Bruijn
> <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:38 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> > > The SIOCGSTAMP/SIOCGSTAMPNS ioctl commands are implemented by many
> > > socket protocol handlers, and all of those end up calling the same
> > > sock_get_timestamp()/sock_get_timestampns() helper functions, which
> > > results in a lot of duplicate code.
> > >
> > > With the introduction of 64-bit time_t on 32-bit architectures, this
> > > gets worse, as we then need four different ioctl commands in each
> > > socket protocol implementation.
> > >
> > > To simplify that, let's add a new .gettstamp() operation in
> > > struct proto_ops, and move ioctl implementation into the common
> > > sock_ioctl()/compat_sock_ioctl_trans() functions that these all go
> > > through.
> > >
> > > We can reuse the sock_get_timestamp() implementation, but generalize
> > > it so it can deal with both native and compat mode, as well as
> > > timeval and timespec structures.
> > >
> > > Acked-by: Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAK8P3a038aDQQotzua_QtKGhq8O9n+rdiz2=WDCp82ys8eUT+A@mail.gmail.com/
> > > Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > > ---
> > > v2: reworked to not break sparc64 support
> >
> > From the discussion of v1 I thought you planned to unconditionally
> > call sock_gettstamp() for all protocols, avoiding the need to plumb in
> > all these new callbacks?
> >
> > That is more concise, though this closer to the existing behavior. So,
> > fine either way.
>
> Thanks for the reminder. I have definitely waited too long before revisiting
> this series, and only had a vague recollection of that discussion but could
> not find it in the logs (found it now, and the Link I quoted...).
>
> I would prefer to get this series into the coming merge window, and
> probably don't have time to rework it completely by then, so I hope
> the current version is ok.

Absolutely. This is a great simplification either way.

> I also found your comment on lock_sock(), which could be easily
> added inside of sock_gettstamp() if you think we should have that.

To remind, the issue is that sock_enable_timestamp should update both
sk_flags and net_enable_timestamp as one atomic operation, by holding
the socket lock. The lock is held when called from a setsockopt path.
And from some ioctl() implementations. The syzkaller reproducer
triggered through inet_release, so the most widely used paths are
buggy today.

Since the current state is inconsistent already, we can defer the fix.
I expect that it is now safe to add a lock around this logic without
triggering lockdep issues in any of the numerous paths. But just in
case, it still seems safer to do that in a separate patch that we can
revert or rework independent from this, if that would prove necessary.

> There is one more issue I just noticed (I dropped the necessary
> sock_read_timestamp()), so I have to repost the series anyway
> to fix that.

Instead of reading sk->sk_stamp directly? Yes, makes sense.