netdev - [PATCH v4 net-next 3/8] hsr: Avoid double remove of a node.

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: <20221125165610.3802446-4-bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Date:   Fri, 25 Nov 2022 17:56:05 +0100
From:   Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Kurt Kanzenbach <kurt@...utronix.de>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH v4 net-next 3/8] hsr: Avoid double remove of a node.

Due to the hashed-MAC optimisation one problem become visible:
hsr_handle_sup_frame() walks over the list of available nodes and merges
two node entries into one if based on the information in the supervision
both MAC addresses belong to one node. The list-walk happens on a RCU
protected list and delete operation happens under a lock.

If the supervision arrives on both slave interfaces at the same time
then this delete operation can occur simultaneously on two CPUs. The
result is the first-CPU deletes the from the list and the second CPUs
BUGs while attempting to dereference a poisoned list-entry. This happens
more likely with the optimisation because a new node for the mac_B entry
is created once a packet has been received and removed (merged) once the
supervision frame has been received.

Avoid removing/ cleaning up a hsr_node twice by adding a `removed' field
which is set to true after the removal and checked before the removal.

Fixes: f266a683a4804 ("net/hsr: Better frame dispatch")
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
---
 net/hsr/hsr_framereg.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
 net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h |  1 +
 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.c b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.c
index 9b8eaebce2549..f2dd846ff9038 100644
--- a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.c
+++ b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.c
@@ -366,9 +366,12 @@ void hsr_handle_sup_frame(struct hsr_frame_info *frame)
 	node_real->addr_B_port = port_rcv->type;
 
 	spin_lock_bh(&hsr->list_lock);
-	list_del_rcu(&node_curr->mac_list);
+	if (!node_curr->removed) {
+		list_del_rcu(&node_curr->mac_list);
+		node_curr->removed = true;
+		kfree_rcu(node_curr, rcu_head);
+	}
 	spin_unlock_bh(&hsr->list_lock);
-	kfree_rcu(node_curr, rcu_head);
 
 done:
 	/* Push back here */
@@ -539,9 +542,12 @@ void hsr_prune_nodes(struct timer_list *t)
 		if (time_is_before_jiffies(timestamp +
 				msecs_to_jiffies(HSR_NODE_FORGET_TIME))) {
 			hsr_nl_nodedown(hsr, node->macaddress_A);
-			list_del_rcu(&node->mac_list);
-			/* Note that we need to free this entry later: */
-			kfree_rcu(node, rcu_head);
+			if (!node->removed) {
+				list_del_rcu(&node->mac_list);
+				node->removed = true;
+				/* Note that we need to free this entry later: */
+				kfree_rcu(node, rcu_head);
+			}
 		}
 	}
 	spin_unlock_bh(&hsr->list_lock);
diff --git a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
index bdbb8c822ba1a..b5f902397bf1a 100644
--- a/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
+++ b/net/hsr/hsr_framereg.h
@@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ struct hsr_node {
 	bool			san_a;
 	bool			san_b;
 	u16			seq_out[HSR_PT_PORTS];
+	bool			removed;
 	struct rcu_head		rcu_head;
 };
 
-- 
2.38.1