[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200218220507.cqlhd4kj4ukyjhuu@salvia>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 23:05:07 +0100
From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
NetFilter <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
syzbot <syzbot+d195fd3b9a364ddd6731@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch nf] netfilter: xt_hashlimit: unregister proc file before
releasing mutex
On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 01:40:26PM -0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 1:35 PM Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 12, 2020 at 10:53:52PM -0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> > > Before releasing the global mutex, we only unlink the hashtable
> > > from the hash list, its proc file is still not unregistered at
> > > this point. So syzbot could trigger a race condition where a
> > > parallel htable_create() could register the same file immediately
> > > after the mutex is released.
> > >
> > > Move htable_remove_proc_entry() back to mutex protection to
> > > fix this. And, fold htable_destroy() into htable_put() to make
> > > the code slightly easier to understand.
> >
> > Probably revert previous one?
>
> The hung task could appear again if we move the cleanup
> back under mutex.
How could the hung task appear again by reverting
c4a3922d2d20c710f827? Please elaborate.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists