netdev - Re: [PATCH net] mptcp: fix locking in mptcp

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: <9cf07f1b-c013-adfc-15b4-58902095cf07@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Jan 2021 20:21:48 +0100
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     mptcp@...ts.01.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] mptcp: fix locking in mptcp_disconnect()



On 1/14/21 4:37 PM, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> tcp_disconnect() expects the caller acquires the sock lock,
> but mptcp_disconnect() is not doing that. Add the missing
> required lock.
> 
> Reported-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> Fixes: 76e2a55d1625 ("mptcp: better msk-level shutdown.")
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
> ---
>  net/mptcp/protocol.c | 9 +++++++--
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/mptcp/protocol.c b/net/mptcp/protocol.c
> index 81faeff8f3bb..f998a077c7dd 100644
> --- a/net/mptcp/protocol.c
> +++ b/net/mptcp/protocol.c
> @@ -2646,8 +2646,13 @@ static int mptcp_disconnect(struct sock *sk, int flags)
>  	struct mptcp_sock *msk = mptcp_sk(sk);
>  
>  	__mptcp_flush_join_list(msk);
> -	mptcp_for_each_subflow(msk, subflow)
> -		tcp_disconnect(mptcp_subflow_tcp_sock(subflow), flags);
> +	mptcp_for_each_subflow(msk, subflow) {
> +		struct sock *ssk = mptcp_subflow_tcp_sock(subflow);
> +
> +		lock_sock(ssk);
> +		tcp_disconnect(ssk, flags);
> +		release_sock(ssk);
> +	}

Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>

Note that for loops like this one, calling non blocking functions,
you could use lock_sock_fast()

(Probably does not matter in slow path)