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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <f2d0aaad-70ca-4417-bf8e-0d7006be6ebc@linux.dev> Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 01:12:34 +0100 From: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev> To: Alexandru Matei <alexandru.matei@...ath.com>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>, Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mihai Petrisor <mihai.petrisor@...ath.com>, Viorel Canja <viorel.canja@...ath.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] vsock: initialize the_virtio_vsock before using VQs On 18/10/2023 19:32, Alexandru Matei wrote: > Once VQs are filled with empty buffers and we kick the host, it can send > connection requests. If 'the_virtio_vsock' is not initialized before, > replies are silently dropped and do not reach the host. > > Fixes: 0deab087b16a ("vsock/virtio: use RCU to avoid use-after-free on the_virtio_vsock") > Signed-off-by: Alexandru Matei <alexandru.matei@...ath.com> > --- > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 7 ++++--- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c > index e95df847176b..eae0867133f8 100644 > --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c > +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c > @@ -658,12 +658,13 @@ static int virtio_vsock_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev) > vsock->seqpacket_allow = true; > > vdev->priv = vsock; > + rcu_assign_pointer(the_virtio_vsock, vsock); > > ret = virtio_vsock_vqs_init(vsock); > - if (ret < 0) > + if (ret < 0) { > + rcu_assign_pointer(the_virtio_vsock, NULL); > goto out; > - > - rcu_assign_pointer(the_virtio_vsock, vsock); > + } > > mutex_unlock(&the_virtio_vsock_mutex); > Looks like virtio_vsock_restore() needs the same changes. But virtio_vsock_vqs_init() can fail only in virtio_find_vqs(). Maybe it can be split into 2 functions to avoid second rcu_assign_pointer() in case of error?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists