linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.19 44/49] rxrpc: Fix some missing _bh annotations on locking conn->state

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20201012132631.436768553@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 12 Oct 2020 15:27:30 +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, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.19 44/49] rxrpc: Fix some missing _bh annotations on locking conn->state_lock

From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>

[ Upstream commit fa1d113a0f96f9ab7e4fe4f8825753ba1e34a9d3 ]

conn->state_lock may be taken in softirq mode, but a previous patch
replaced an outer lock in the response-packet event handling code, and lost
the _bh from that when doing so.

Fix this by applying the _bh annotation to the state_lock locking.

Fixes: a1399f8bb033 ("rxrpc: Call channels should have separate call number spaces")
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 net/rxrpc/conn_event.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/rxrpc/conn_event.c b/net/rxrpc/conn_event.c
index 126154a97a592..04213afd7710f 100644
--- a/net/rxrpc/conn_event.c
+++ b/net/rxrpc/conn_event.c
@@ -342,18 +342,18 @@ static int rxrpc_process_event(struct rxrpc_connection *conn,
 			return ret;
 
 		spin_lock(&conn->channel_lock);
-		spin_lock(&conn->state_lock);
+		spin_lock_bh(&conn->state_lock);
 
 		if (conn->state == RXRPC_CONN_SERVICE_CHALLENGING) {
 			conn->state = RXRPC_CONN_SERVICE;
-			spin_unlock(&conn->state_lock);
+			spin_unlock_bh(&conn->state_lock);
 			for (loop = 0; loop < RXRPC_MAXCALLS; loop++)
 				rxrpc_call_is_secure(
 					rcu_dereference_protected(
 						conn->channels[loop].call,
 						lockdep_is_held(&conn->channel_lock)));
 		} else {
-			spin_unlock(&conn->state_lock);
+			spin_unlock_bh(&conn->state_lock);
 		}
 
 		spin_unlock(&conn->channel_lock);
-- 
2.25.1