linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.4 17/43] net: bridge: br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu() should dereference the VLAN group under RCU

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: <20200925124726.178619091@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Fri, 25 Sep 2020 14:48:29 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH 5.4 17/43] net: bridge: br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu() should dereference the VLAN group under RCU

From: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>

[ Upstream commit 99f62a746066fa436aa15d4606a538569540db08 ]

When calling the RCU brother of br_vlan_get_pvid(), lockdep warns:

=============================
WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
5.9.0-rc3-01631-g13c17acb8e38-dirty #814 Not tainted
-----------------------------
net/bridge/br_private.h:1054 suspicious rcu_dereference_protected() usage!

Call trace:
 lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xd4/0xf8
 __br_vlan_get_pvid+0xc0/0x100
 br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu+0x78/0x108

The warning is because br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu() calls nbp_vlan_group()
which calls rtnl_dereference() instead of rcu_dereference(). In turn,
rtnl_dereference() calls rcu_dereference_protected() which assumes
operation under an RCU write-side critical section, which obviously is
not the case here. So, when the incorrect primitive is used to access
the RCU-protected VLAN group pointer, READ_ONCE() is not used, which may
cause various unexpected problems.

I'm sad to say that br_vlan_get_pvid() and br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu() cannot
share the same implementation. So fix the bug by splitting the 2
functions, and making br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu() retrieve the VLAN groups
under proper locking annotations.

Fixes: 7582f5b70f9a ("bridge: add br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu()")
Signed-off-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@....com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 net/bridge/br_vlan.c |   27 +++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

--- a/net/bridge/br_vlan.c
+++ b/net/bridge/br_vlan.c
@@ -1229,11 +1229,13 @@ void br_vlan_get_stats(const struct net_
 	}
 }
 
-static int __br_vlan_get_pvid(const struct net_device *dev,
-			      struct net_bridge_port *p, u16 *p_pvid)
+int br_vlan_get_pvid(const struct net_device *dev, u16 *p_pvid)
 {
 	struct net_bridge_vlan_group *vg;
+	struct net_bridge_port *p;
 
+	ASSERT_RTNL();
+	p = br_port_get_check_rtnl(dev);
 	if (p)
 		vg = nbp_vlan_group(p);
 	else if (netif_is_bridge_master(dev))
@@ -1244,18 +1246,23 @@ static int __br_vlan_get_pvid(const stru
 	*p_pvid = br_get_pvid(vg);
 	return 0;
 }
-
-int br_vlan_get_pvid(const struct net_device *dev, u16 *p_pvid)
-{
-	ASSERT_RTNL();
-
-	return __br_vlan_get_pvid(dev, br_port_get_check_rtnl(dev), p_pvid);
-}
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(br_vlan_get_pvid);
 
 int br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu(const struct net_device *dev, u16 *p_pvid)
 {
-	return __br_vlan_get_pvid(dev, br_port_get_check_rcu(dev), p_pvid);
+	struct net_bridge_vlan_group *vg;
+	struct net_bridge_port *p;
+
+	p = br_port_get_check_rcu(dev);
+	if (p)
+		vg = nbp_vlan_group_rcu(p);
+	else if (netif_is_bridge_master(dev))
+		vg = br_vlan_group_rcu(netdev_priv(dev));
+	else
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	*p_pvid = br_get_pvid(vg);
+	return 0;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(br_vlan_get_pvid_rcu);