netdev - Re: [PATCH] skbuff: fix a data race in skb_queue

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 3 Feb 2020 12:28:52 -0800
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Qian Cai <cai@....pw>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, elver@...gle.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] skbuff: fix a data race in skb_queue_len()



On 2/3/20 12:19 PM, Qian Cai wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Feb 3, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> We do not want to add READ_ONCE() for all uses of skb_queue_len()
>>
>> This could hide some real bugs, and could generate slightly less
>> efficient code in the cases we have the lock held.
> 
> Good point. I should have thought about that. How about introducing 2 new helpers.
> 
> skb_queue_len_once()
> unix_recvq_full_once()
> 
> which will have a READ_ONCE() there, and then unix_dgram_sendmsg() could use that instead?
> 

We added recently skb_queue_empty_lockless() helper, to use in these contexts.

The fact that we use READ_ONCE() is more of an implementation detail I think.

Also, addressing load-stearing issues without making sure the write side
is using WRITE_ONCE() might be not enough (even if KCSAN warnings disappear)