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  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]
Date:   Sun, 19 Mar 2017 21:09:38 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <>
To:     Kaiwen Xu <>
Cc:     David Miller <>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: Do not hold the reference for the same sk_rx_dst

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 9:03 PM, Kaiwen Xu <> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 08:49:43PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 6:48 PM, Kevin Xu <> wrote:
>> > In some rare cases, inet_sk_rx_dst_set() may be called multiple times
>> > on the same dst, causing double refcounting. Eventually, it
>> > prevents net_device to be destroyed. The bug manifested as
>> >
>> > unregister_netdevice: waiting for lo to become free. Usage count = 1
>> >
>> > in the kernel log, preventing new network namespace creation.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Xu <>
>> Don't know why you don't follow the discussion on your v1...
>> It is protected by bh_lock_sock(), so your patch is not needed
>> at all.
>> Read net/ipv4/udp.c:
>> 1762 /* For TCP sockets, sk_rx_dst is protected by socket lock
>> 1763  * For UDP, we use xchg() to guard against concurrent changes.
>> 1764  */
> I probably misunderstood. Do you mean v2 patch is actually not needed or
> the whole workaround is not necessary?

Your patch, no matter v1 or v2, is not needed because we use
bh_lock_sock() to serialize inet_sk_rx_dst_set(), unless you find
a case where we miss the bh_lock_sock(), but you don't say it in
your changelog. "some rare cases" is not enough to justify this bug.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists