[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f87bd4b7-81d5-1f0c-137e-ecbc02753257@oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2019 09:24:48 +0800
From: Yanjun Zhu <yanjun.zhu@...cle.com>
To: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
keescook@...omium.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: nvidia: forcedeth: Fix two possible concurrency
use-after-free bugs
On 2019/1/8 20:57, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
>
>
> On 2019/1/8 20:54, Zhu Yanjun wrote:
>>
>> 在 2019/1/8 20:45, Jia-Ju Bai 写道:
>>> In drivers/net/ethernet/nvidia/forcedeth.c, the functions
>>> nv_start_xmit() and nv_start_xmit_optimized() can be concurrently
>>> executed with nv_poll_controller().
>>>
>>> nv_start_xmit
>>> line 2321: prev_tx_ctx->skb = skb;
>>>
>>> nv_start_xmit_optimized
>>> line 2479: prev_tx_ctx->skb = skb;
>>>
>>> nv_poll_controller
>>> nv_do_nic_poll
>>> line 4134: spin_lock(&np->lock);
>>> nv_drain_rxtx
>>> nv_drain_tx
>>> nv_release_txskb
>>> line 2004: dev_kfree_skb_any(tx_skb->skb);
>>>
>>> Thus, two possible concurrency use-after-free bugs may occur.
>>>
>>> To fix these possible bugs,
>>
>>
>> Does this really occur? Can you reproduce this ?
>
> This bug is not found by the real execution.
> It is found by a static tool written by myself, and then I check it by
> manual code review.
Before "line 2004: dev_kfree_skb_any(tx_skb->skb); ",
"
nv_disable_irq(dev);
nv_napi_disable(dev);
netif_tx_lock_bh(dev);
netif_addr_lock(dev);
spin_lock(&np->lock);
/* stop engines */
nv_stop_rxtx(dev); <---this stop rxtx
nv_txrx_reset(dev);
"
In this case, does nv_start_xmit or nv_start_xmit_optimized still work well?
Zhu Yanjun
>
>
> Best wishes,
> Jia-Ju Bai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists