netdev - [PATCH 01/16] netfilter: nf_conncount: use spin_lock_bh instead of spin

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: <20181128101741.20924-2-pablo@netfilter.org>
Date:   Wed, 28 Nov 2018 11:17:26 +0100
From:   Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:     netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 01/16] netfilter: nf_conncount: use spin_lock_bh instead of spin_lock

From: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>

conn_free() holds lock with spin_lock() and it is called by both
nf_conncount_lookup() and nf_conncount_gc_list(). nf_conncount_lookup()
is called from bottom-half context and nf_conncount_gc_list() from
process context. So that spin_lock() call is not safe. Hence
conn_free() should use spin_lock_bh() instead of spin_lock().

test commands:
   %nft add table ip filter
   %nft add chain ip filter input { type filter hook input priority 0\; }
   %nft add rule filter input meter test { ip saddr ct count over 2 } \
	   counter

splat looks like:
[  461.996507] ================================
[  461.998999] WARNING: inconsistent lock state
[  461.998999] 4.19.0-rc6+ #22 Not tainted
[  461.998999] --------------------------------
[  461.998999] inconsistent {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} -> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} usage.
[  461.998999] kworker/0:2/134 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes:
[  461.998999] 00000000a71a559a (&(&list->list_lock)->rlock){+.?.}, at: conn_free+0x69/0x2b0 [nf_conncount]
[  461.998999] {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} state was registered at:
[  461.998999]   _raw_spin_lock+0x30/0x70
[  461.998999]   nf_conncount_add+0x28a/0x520 [nf_conncount]
[  461.998999]   nft_connlimit_eval+0x401/0x580 [nft_connlimit]
[  461.998999]   nft_dynset_eval+0x32b/0x590 [nf_tables]
[  461.998999]   nft_do_chain+0x497/0x1430 [nf_tables]
[  461.998999]   nft_do_chain_ipv4+0x255/0x330 [nf_tables]
[  461.998999]   nf_hook_slow+0xb1/0x160
[ ... ]
[  461.998999] other info that might help us debug this:
[  461.998999]  Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[  461.998999]
[  461.998999]        CPU0
[  461.998999]        ----
[  461.998999]   lock(&(&list->list_lock)->rlock);
[  461.998999]   <Interrupt>
[  461.998999]     lock(&(&list->list_lock)->rlock);
[  461.998999]
[  461.998999]  *** DEADLOCK ***
[  461.998999]
[ ... ]

Fixes: 5c789e131cbb ("netfilter: nf_conncount: Add list lock and gc worker, and RCU for init tree search")
Signed-off-by: Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
---
 net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c | 12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c
index 02ca7df793f5..71b1f4f99580 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conncount.c
@@ -106,15 +106,15 @@ nf_conncount_add(struct nf_conncount_list *list,
 	conn->zone = *zone;
 	conn->cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
 	conn->jiffies32 = (u32)jiffies;
-	spin_lock(&list->list_lock);
+	spin_lock_bh(&list->list_lock);
 	if (list->dead == true) {
 		kmem_cache_free(conncount_conn_cachep, conn);
-		spin_unlock(&list->list_lock);
+		spin_unlock_bh(&list->list_lock);
 		return NF_CONNCOUNT_SKIP;
 	}
 	list_add_tail(&conn->node, &list->head);
 	list->count++;
-	spin_unlock(&list->list_lock);
+	spin_unlock_bh(&list->list_lock);
 	return NF_CONNCOUNT_ADDED;
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(nf_conncount_add);
@@ -132,10 +132,10 @@ static bool conn_free(struct nf_conncount_list *list,
 {
 	bool free_entry = false;
 
-	spin_lock(&list->list_lock);
+	spin_lock_bh(&list->list_lock);
 
 	if (list->count == 0) {
-		spin_unlock(&list->list_lock);
+		spin_unlock_bh(&list->list_lock);
                 return free_entry;
 	}
 
@@ -144,7 +144,7 @@ static bool conn_free(struct nf_conncount_list *list,
 	if (list->count == 0)
 		free_entry = true;
 
-	spin_unlock(&list->list_lock);
+	spin_unlock_bh(&list->list_lock);
 	call_rcu(&conn->rcu_head, __conn_free);
 	return free_entry;
 }
-- 
2.11.0