[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YUBTVBioqJ7qas2R@T590>
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 15:46:28 +0800
From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To: "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Cc: axboe@...nel.dk, josef@...icpanda.com, hch@...radead.org,
linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
nbd@...er.debian.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/6] nbd: convert to use blk_mq_find_and_get_req()
On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 03:13:38PM +0800, yukuai (C) wrote:
> On 2021/09/14 14:44, Ming Lei wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 11:11:06AM +0800, yukuai (C) wrote:
> > > On 2021/09/14 9:11, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:12:55PM +0800, Yu Kuai wrote:
> > > > > blk_mq_tag_to_rq() can only ensure to return valid request in
> > > > > following situation:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1) client send request message to server first
> > > > > submit_bio
> > > > > ...
> > > > > blk_mq_get_tag
> > > > > ...
> > > > > blk_mq_get_driver_tag
> > > > > ...
> > > > > nbd_queue_rq
> > > > > nbd_handle_cmd
> > > > > nbd_send_cmd
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) client receive respond message from server
> > > > > recv_work
> > > > > nbd_read_stat
> > > > > blk_mq_tag_to_rq
> > > > >
> > > > > If step 1) is missing, blk_mq_tag_to_rq() will return a stale
> > > > > request, which might be freed. Thus convert to use
> > > > > blk_mq_find_and_get_req() to make sure the returned request is not
> > > > > freed.
> > > >
> > > > But NBD_CMD_INFLIGHT has been added for checking if the reply is
> > > > expected, do we still need blk_mq_find_and_get_req() for covering
> > > > this issue? BTW, request and its payload is pre-allocated, so there
> > > > isn't real use-after-free.
> > >
> > > Hi, Ming
> > >
> > > Checking NBD_CMD_INFLIGHT relied on the request founded by tag is valid,
> > > not the other way round.
> > >
> > > nbd_read_stat
> > > req = blk_mq_tag_to_rq()
> > > cmd = blk_mq_rq_to_pdu(req)
> > > mutex_lock(cmd->lock)
> > > checking NBD_CMD_INFLIGHT
> >
> > Request and its payload is pre-allocated, and either req->ref or cmd->lock can
> > serve the same purpose here. Once cmd->lock is held, you can check if the cmd is
> > inflight or not. If it isn't inflight, just return -ENOENT. Is there any
> > problem to handle in this way?
>
> Hi, Ming
>
> in nbd_read_stat:
>
> 1) get a request by tag first
> 2) get nbd_cmd by the request
> 3) hold cmd->lock and check if cmd is inflight
>
> If we want to check if the cmd is inflight in step 3), we have to do
> setp 1) and 2) first. As I explained in patch 0, blk_mq_tag_to_rq()
> can't make sure the returned request is not freed:
>
> nbd_read_stat
> blk_mq_sched_free_requests
> blk_mq_free_rqs
> blk_mq_tag_to_rq
> -> get rq before clear mapping
> blk_mq_clear_rq_mapping
> __free_pages -> rq is freed
> blk_mq_request_started -> UAF
If the above can happen, blk_mq_find_and_get_req() may not fix it too, just
wondering why not take the following simpler way for avoiding the UAF?
diff --git a/drivers/block/nbd.c b/drivers/block/nbd.c
index 5170a630778d..dfa5cce71f66 100644
--- a/drivers/block/nbd.c
+++ b/drivers/block/nbd.c
@@ -795,9 +795,13 @@ static void recv_work(struct work_struct *work)
work);
struct nbd_device *nbd = args->nbd;
struct nbd_config *config = nbd->config;
+ struct request_queue *q = nbd->disk->queue;
struct nbd_cmd *cmd;
struct request *rq;
+ if (!percpu_ref_tryget(&q->q_usage_counter))
+ return;
+
while (1) {
cmd = nbd_read_stat(nbd, args->index);
if (IS_ERR(cmd)) {
@@ -813,6 +817,7 @@ static void recv_work(struct work_struct *work)
if (likely(!blk_should_fake_timeout(rq->q)))
blk_mq_complete_request(rq);
}
+ blk_queue_exit(q);
nbd_config_put(nbd);
atomic_dec(&config->recv_threads);
wake_up(&config->recv_wq);
Thanks,
Ming
Powered by blists - more mailing lists