linux-kernel - [PATCH 5.10 042/112] sysctl: Fix data races in proc

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: <20220719114630.454008327@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Tue, 19 Jul 2022 13:53:35 +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, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.10 042/112] sysctl: Fix data races in proc_dointvec().

From: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>

[ Upstream commit 1f1be04b4d48a2475ea1aab46a99221bfc5c0968 ]

A sysctl variable is accessed concurrently, and there is always a chance
of data-race.  So, all readers and writers need some basic protection to
avoid load/store-tearing.

This patch changes proc_dointvec() to use READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE()
internally to fix data-races on the sysctl side.  For now, proc_dointvec()
itself is tolerant to a data-race, but we still need to add annotations on
the other subsystem's side.

Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
---
 kernel/sysctl.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
index 8832440a4938..81657b13bd53 100644
--- a/kernel/sysctl.c
+++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
@@ -557,14 +557,14 @@ static int do_proc_dointvec_conv(bool *negp, unsigned long *lvalp,
 		if (*negp) {
 			if (*lvalp > (unsigned long) INT_MAX + 1)
 				return -EINVAL;
-			*valp = -*lvalp;
+			WRITE_ONCE(*valp, -*lvalp);
 		} else {
 			if (*lvalp > (unsigned long) INT_MAX)
 				return -EINVAL;
-			*valp = *lvalp;
+			WRITE_ONCE(*valp, *lvalp);
 		}
 	} else {
-		int val = *valp;
+		int val = READ_ONCE(*valp);
 		if (val < 0) {
 			*negp = true;
 			*lvalp = -(unsigned long)val;
-- 
2.35.1