netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 6/7] bpf, net: Support SO_REUSEPORT sockets with bpf_sk

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: <20230706004044.79850-1-kuniyu@amazon.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2023 17:40:44 -0700
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
To: <lmb@...valent.com>
CC: <andrii@...nel.org>, <ast@...nel.org>, <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
	<daniel@...earbox.net>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <dsahern@...nel.org>,
	<edumazet@...gle.com>, <haoluo@...gle.com>, <hemanthmalla@...il.com>,
	<joe@...ium.io>, <joe@...d.net.nz>, <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	<jolsa@...nel.org>, <kpsingh@...nel.org>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
	<kuniyu@...zon.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, <mykolal@...com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <sdf@...gle.com>,
	<shuah@...nel.org>, <song@...nel.org>, <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
	<yhs@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 6/7] bpf, net: Support SO_REUSEPORT sockets with bpf_sk_assign

From: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...valent.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2023 10:57:23 +0100
> On Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 7:54 PM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com> wrote:
> 
> > > +     reuse_sk = inet6_lookup_reuseport(net, sk, skb, doff,
> > > +                                       saddr, sport, daddr, ntohs(dport),
> > > +                                       ehashfn);
> > > +     if (!reuse_sk || reuse_sk == sk)
> > > +             return sk;
> > > +
> > > +     /* We've chosen a new reuseport sock which is never refcounted. This
> > > +      * implies that sk also isn't refcounted.
> > > +      */
> > > +     WARN_ON_ONCE(*refcounted);
> >
> > One more nit.
> >
> > WARN_ON_ONCE() should be tested before inet6?_lookup_reuseport() not to
> > miss the !reuse_sk case.
> 
> I was just pondering that as well, but I came to the opposite
> conclusion. In the !reuse_sk case we don't really know anything about
> sk, except that it isn't part of a reuseport group. How can we be sure
> that it's not refcounted?

Sorry for late reply.

What we know about sk before inet6?_lookup_reuseport() are

  (1) sk was full socket in bpf_sk_assign()
  (2) sk had SOCK_RCU_FREE in bpf_sk_assign()
  (3) sk was TCP_LISTEN here if TCP

After bpf_sk_assign(), reqsk is never converted to fullsock, and UDP
never clears SOCK_RCU_FREE.  If sk is TCP, now we are in the RCU grace
period and confirmed sk->sk_state was TCP_LISTEN.  Then, TCP_LISTEN sk
cannot be reused and SOCK_RCU_FREE is never cleared.

So, before/after inet6?_lookup_reuseport(), the fact that sk is not
refcounted here should not change in spite of that reuse_sk is NULL.

What do you think ?