linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 159/245] can: bcm: delay release of struct bcm_op after synchronize

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: <20210719144945.545842189@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 19 Jul 2021 16:51:41 +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,
        syzbot+0f7e7e5e2f4f40fa89c0@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
        Norbert Slusarek <nslusarek@....net>,
        Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@...onical.com>,
        Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
        Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 159/245] can: bcm: delay release of struct bcm_op after synchronize_rcu()

From: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@...onical.com>

commit d5f9023fa61ee8b94f37a93f08e94b136cf1e463 upstream.

can_rx_register() callbacks may be called concurrently to the call to
can_rx_unregister(). The callbacks and callback data, though, are
protected by RCU and the struct sock reference count.

So the callback data is really attached to the life of sk, meaning
that it should be released on sk_destruct. However, bcm_remove_op()
calls tasklet_kill(), and RCU callbacks may be called under RCU
softirq, so that cannot be used on kernels before the introduction of
HRTIMER_MODE_SOFT.

However, bcm_rx_handler() is called under RCU protection, so after
calling can_rx_unregister(), we may call synchronize_rcu() in order to
wait for any RCU read-side critical sections to finish. That is,
bcm_rx_handler() won't be called anymore for those ops. So, we only
free them, after we do that synchronize_rcu().

Fixes: ffd980f976e7 ("[CAN]: Add broadcast manager (bcm) protocol")
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210619161813.2098382-1-cascardo@canonical.com
Cc: linux-stable <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Reported-by: syzbot+0f7e7e5e2f4f40fa89c0@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Reported-by: Norbert Slusarek <nslusarek@....net>
Signed-off-by: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo <cascardo@...onical.com>
Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>


---
 net/can/bcm.c |    7 ++++++-
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/net/can/bcm.c
+++ b/net/can/bcm.c
@@ -839,6 +839,7 @@ static int bcm_delete_rx_op(struct list_
 						  bcm_rx_handler, op);
 
 			list_del(&op->list);
+			synchronize_rcu();
 			bcm_remove_op(op);
 			return 1; /* done */
 		}
@@ -1589,9 +1590,13 @@ static int bcm_release(struct socket *so
 					  REGMASK(op->can_id),
 					  bcm_rx_handler, op);
 
-		bcm_remove_op(op);
 	}
 
+	synchronize_rcu();
+
+	list_for_each_entry_safe(op, next, &bo->rx_ops, list)
+		bcm_remove_op(op);
+
 	/* remove procfs entry */
 	if (proc_dir && bo->bcm_proc_read)
 		remove_proc_entry(bo->procname, proc_dir);