netdev - Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in skb_array

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: <20170209194943-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 9 Feb 2017 19:50:11 +0200
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Cc:     Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: net: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected in
 skb_array_produce

On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 11:49:30AM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I've got the following report while running syzkaller fuzzer on mmotm
> >> (git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhocko/mm.git)
> >> remotes/mmotm/auto-latest ee4ba7533626ba7bf2f8b992266467ac9fdc045e:
> >>
> >
> > [...]
> >
> >>
> >> other info that might help us debug this:
> >>
> >>  Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:
> >>
> >>        CPU0                    CPU1
> >>        ----                    ----
> >>   lock(&(&r->consumer_lock)->rlock);
> >>                                local_irq_disable();
> >>                                lock(&(&r->producer_lock)->rlock);
> >>                                lock(&(&r->consumer_lock)->rlock);
> >>   <Interrupt>
> >>     lock(&(&r->producer_lock)->rlock);
> >>
> >
> > Thanks a lot for the testing.
> >
> > Looks like we could address this by using skb_array_consume_bh() instead.
> >
> > Could you pls verify if the following patch works?
> 
> No, I can't test it, sorry. This happened once on bots. And bots
> currently test only upstream versions.

Which trees are tested? Will linux-next help?

> 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
> > index 8a7d6b9..a97c00d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
> > @@ -520,7 +520,7 @@ static void tun_queue_purge(struct tun_file *tfile)
> >  {
> >         struct sk_buff *skb;
> >
> > -       while ((skb = skb_array_consume(&tfile->tx_array)) != NULL)
> > +       while ((skb = skb_array_consume_bh(&tfile->tx_array)) != NULL)
> >                 kfree_skb(skb);
> >
> >         skb_queue_purge(&tfile->sk.sk_write_queue);
> > @@ -1458,7 +1458,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_ring_recv(struct tun_file *tfile, int noblock,
> >         struct sk_buff *skb = NULL;
> >         int error = 0;
> >
> > -       skb = skb_array_consume(&tfile->tx_array);
> > +       skb = skb_array_consume_bh(&tfile->tx_array);
> >         if (skb)
> >                 goto out;
> >         if (noblock) {
> > @@ -1470,7 +1470,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_ring_recv(struct tun_file *tfile, int noblock,
> >         current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
> >
> >         while (1) {
> > -               skb = skb_array_consume(&tfile->tx_array);
> > +               skb = skb_array_consume_bh(&tfile->tx_array);
> >                 if (skb)
> >                         break;
> >                 if (signal_pending(current)) {
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "syzkaller" group.
> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to syzkaller+unsubscribe@...glegroups.com.
> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.