netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] xdp: avoid calling kfree twice

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

Message-ID: <87a6unp8ck.fsf@toke.dk>
Date:   Wed, 09 Dec 2020 11:44:11 +0100
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
To:     Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@...el.com>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
        "Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, jonathan.lemon@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] xdp: avoid calling kfree twice

Zhu Yanjun <zyjzyj2000@...il.com> writes:

> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 1:12 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>>
>> On 12/9/20 6:03 AM, Zhu Yanjun wrote:
>> > In the function xdp_umem_pin_pages, if npgs != umem->npgs and
>> > npgs >= 0, the function xdp_umem_unpin_pages is called. In this
>> > function, kfree is called to handle umem->pgs, and then in the
>> > function xdp_umem_pin_pages, kfree is called again to handle
>> > umem->pgs. Eventually, umem->pgs is freed twice.
>> >
>> > Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>
>> > Signed-off-by: Zhu Yanjun <yanjun.zhu@...el.com>
>>
>> Please also fix up the commit log according to Bjorn's prior feedback [0].
>> If it's just a cleanup, it should state so, the commit message right now
>> makes it sound like an actual double free bug.
>
> The umem->pgs is actually freed twice. Since umem->pgs is set to NULL
> after the first kfree,
> the second kfree would not trigger call trace.
> IMO, the commit log is very clear about this.

Yes, it is very clear; and also wrong. As someone already pointed out,
passing a NULL pointer to kfree() doesn't actually lead to a double
free:

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/mm/slub.c#L4106

-Toke