netdev - Re: INFO: task hung in addrconf_verify

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAM_iQpUG4_xABqCdjwm77QRhYYh=5B5dV69_ac5SjEuwJa4qNw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Oct 2019 11:02:31 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     syzbot <syzbot+cf0adbb9c28c8866c788@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, hawk@...nel.org,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Petr Machata <petrm@...lanox.com>,
        Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>, yhs@...com
Subject: Re: INFO: task hung in addrconf_verify_work (2)

On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 10:37 PM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> Infinite loop because tcf_add_notify() returns -EAGAIN as the message can not be delivered to the socket,
> since its SO_RCVBUF has been set to 0.

Interesting corner case...

>
> Perhaps we need this patch ?

This patch looks reasonable to me, as the -EAGAIN here is mainly (if not
totally) for the locking retry logic.

Thanks.