[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200411190501.13249-1-fw@strlen.de>
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 2020 21:05:01 +0200
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, mptcp@...ts.01.org,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
syzbot+e56606435b7bfeea8cf5@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: [PATCH net] mptcp: fix double-unlock in mptcp_poll
mptcp_connect/28740 is trying to release lock (sk_lock-AF_INET) at:
[<ffffffff82c15869>] mptcp_poll+0xb9/0x550
but there are no more locks to release!
Call Trace:
lock_release+0x50f/0x750
release_sock+0x171/0x1b0
mptcp_poll+0xb9/0x550
sock_poll+0x157/0x470
? get_net_ns+0xb0/0xb0
do_sys_poll+0x63c/0xdd0
Problem is that __mptcp_tcp_fallback() releases the mptcp socket lock,
but after recent change it doesn't do this in all of its return paths.
To fix this, remove the unlock from __mptcp_tcp_fallback() and
always do the unlock in the caller.
Also add a small comment as to why we have this
__mptcp_needs_tcp_fallback().
Fixes: 0b4f33def7bbde ("mptcp: fix tcp fallback crash")
Reported-by: syzbot+e56606435b7bfeea8cf5@...kaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
---
NB: Reproducer did not trigger for me, so i can't be 100% sure,
but looking at the 'Fixes' commit the change to
__mptcp_needs_tcp_fallback was broken.
net/mptcp/protocol.c | 25 +++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/mptcp/protocol.c b/net/mptcp/protocol.c
index 72f3176dc924..559253be6a21 100644
--- a/net/mptcp/protocol.c
+++ b/net/mptcp/protocol.c
@@ -97,12 +97,7 @@ static struct socket *__mptcp_tcp_fallback(struct mptcp_sock *msk)
if (likely(!__mptcp_needs_tcp_fallback(msk)))
return NULL;
- if (msk->subflow) {
- release_sock((struct sock *)msk);
- return msk->subflow;
- }
-
- return NULL;
+ return msk->subflow;
}
static bool __mptcp_can_create_subflow(const struct mptcp_sock *msk)
@@ -734,9 +729,10 @@ static int mptcp_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
goto out;
}
+fallback:
ssock = __mptcp_tcp_fallback(msk);
if (unlikely(ssock)) {
-fallback:
+ release_sock(sk);
pr_debug("fallback passthrough");
ret = sock_sendmsg(ssock, msg);
return ret >= 0 ? ret + copied : (copied ? copied : ret);
@@ -778,8 +774,14 @@ static int mptcp_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
if (ret < 0)
break;
if (ret == 0 && unlikely(__mptcp_needs_tcp_fallback(msk))) {
+ /* Can happen for passive sockets:
+ * 3WHS negotiated MPTCP, but first packet after is
+ * plain TCP (e.g. due to middlebox filtering unknown
+ * options).
+ *
+ * Fall back to TCP.
+ */
release_sock(ssk);
- ssock = __mptcp_tcp_fallback(msk);
goto fallback;
}
@@ -892,6 +894,7 @@ static int mptcp_recvmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len,
ssock = __mptcp_tcp_fallback(msk);
if (unlikely(ssock)) {
fallback:
+ release_sock(sk);
pr_debug("fallback-read subflow=%p",
mptcp_subflow_ctx(ssock->sk));
copied = sock_recvmsg(ssock, msg, flags);
@@ -1476,12 +1479,11 @@ static int mptcp_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int level, int optname,
*/
lock_sock(sk);
ssock = __mptcp_tcp_fallback(msk);
+ release_sock(sk);
if (ssock)
return tcp_setsockopt(ssock->sk, level, optname, optval,
optlen);
- release_sock(sk);
-
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
}
@@ -1501,12 +1503,11 @@ static int mptcp_getsockopt(struct sock *sk, int level, int optname,
*/
lock_sock(sk);
ssock = __mptcp_tcp_fallback(msk);
+ release_sock(sk);
if (ssock)
return tcp_getsockopt(ssock->sk, level, optname, optval,
option);
- release_sock(sk);
-
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
}
--
2.24.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists