[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <51757d82f7eb33e5988562b54a6c0ae11ae6a4275b2b3150189cdeed2bd96c29@mail.kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 03:08:48 +0000 (UTC)
From: bot+bpf-ci@...nel.org
To: roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mhocko@...e.com,ast@...nel.org,mattbobrowski@...gle.com,shakeel.butt@...ux.dev,inwardvessel@...il.com,linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,linux-mm@...ck.org,surenb@...gle.com,hannes@...xchg.org,akpm@...ux-foundation.org,roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,ast@...nel.org,andrii@...nel.org,daniel@...earbox.net,martin.lau@...nel.org,eddyz87@...il.com,yonghong.song@...ux.dev,clm@...a.com,ihor.solodrai@...ux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/17] bpf: allow attaching struct_ops to cgroups
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c b/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c
> index 69988af44b37..7b1903be6f69 100644
[ ... ]
> @@ -307,12 +308,23 @@ static void cgroup_bpf_release(struct work_struct *work)
> bpf.release_work);
> struct bpf_prog_array *old_array;
> struct list_head *storages = &cgrp->bpf.storages;
> + struct bpf_struct_ops_link *st_link, *st_tmp;
> struct bpf_cgroup_storage *storage, *stmp;
> + LIST_HEAD(st_links);
>
> unsigned int atype;
>
> cgroup_lock();
>
> + list_splice_init(&cgrp->bpf.struct_ops_links, &st_links);
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(st_link, st_tmp, &st_links, list) {
> + st_link->cgroup = NULL;
> + st_link->cgroup_removed = true;
> + cgroup_put(cgrp);
> + if (IS_ERR(bpf_link_inc_not_zero(&st_link->link)))
> + list_del(&st_link->list);
> + }
Can this code access st_link after it has been freed?
Once st_link->cgroup is set to NULL, if another CPU concurrently closes
the link FD, bpf_struct_ops_map_link_dealloc() will see st_link->cgroup
as NULL, skip the cgroup_bpf_detach_struct_ops() call, and proceed to
kfree(st_link). Then the bpf_link_inc_not_zero() call here would access
freed memory.
The race window is between setting st_link->cgroup = NULL and calling
bpf_link_inc_not_zero(). During this window:
CPU 0 (cgroup_bpf_release) CPU 1 (close link FD)
--------------------------- ---------------------
st_link->cgroup = NULL
bpf_link_put_direct()
bpf_link_free()
bpf_struct_ops_map_link_dealloc()
if (st_link->cgroup) // false
kfree(st_link) // freed!
bpf_link_inc_not_zero() // use-after-free
Would it be safer to call bpf_link_inc_not_zero() before modifying
st_link fields? That way, if the link is already at refcount zero,
the loop would skip it; otherwise, the held reference would prevent
the concurrent free.
---
AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md
CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/21382620878
AI-authorship-score: low
AI-authorship-explanation: The commit is authored by a known kernel maintainer with a consistent, human-like technical writing style and appropriate kernel development patterns.
issues-found: 1
issue-severity-score: medium
issue-severity-explanation: Use-after-free race condition in cgroup_bpf_release() that can cause kernel crash when link FD is closed concurrently with cgroup deletion.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists