netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: Do not break out of sk_stream_wait_memory() with TIF_NOTIFY

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: <9c63cf0c31792270026fc673334aa76f855eae35.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 13:30:26 +0100
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kernel@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jens Axboe
	 <axboe@...nel.dk>, io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Do not break out of sk_stream_wait_memory() with
 TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL

On Mon, 2024-03-18 at 13:03 +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Apologies, I have sent the wrong mail. Here is the mail I really wanted
> to send, with answers to some of the questions Paolo raised the last
> time I sent it.
> 
> -----------------------------------8<------------------------------
> 
> > From 566bb198546423c024cdebc50d0aade7ed638a40 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
> Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2023 14:13:46 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH v2] net: Do not break out of sk_stream_wait_memory() with TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL
> 
> It can happen that a socket sends the remaining data at close() time.
> With io_uring and KTLS it can happen that sk_stream_wait_memory() bails
> out with -512 (-ERESTARTSYS) because TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL is set for the
> current task. This flag has been set in io_req_normal_work_add() by
> calling task_work_add().
> 
> It seems signal_pending() is too broad, so this patch replaces it with
> task_sigpending(), thus ignoring the TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL flag.
> 
> A discussion of this issue can be found at
> https://lore.kernel.org/20231010141932.GD3114228@pengutronix.de
> 
> Suggested-by: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
> Fixes: 12db8b690010c ("entry: Add support for TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL")
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231023121346.4098160-1-s.hauer@pengutronix.de
> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
> ---
> 
> Changes since v1:
> - only replace signal_pending() with task_sigpending() where we need it,
>   in sk_stream_wait_memory()
> 
> I'd like to pick up the discussion on this patch as it is still needed for our
> usecase. Paolo Abeni raised some concerns about this patch for which I didn't have
> good answers. I am referencing them here again with an attempts to answer them.
> Jens, maybe you also have a few words here.
> 
> Paolo raised some concerns in
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/e1e15554bfa5cfc8048d6074eedbc83c4d912c98.camel@redhat.com/:
> 
> > To be more explicit: why this will not cause user-space driven
> > connect() from missing relevant events?
> 
> Note I dropped the hunk in sk_stream_wait_connect() and
> sk_stream_wait_close() in this version.
> Userspace driven signals are still catched with task_sigpending() which
> tests for TIF_SIGPENDING. signal_pending() will additionally check for
> TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL which is exclusively used by task_work_add() to add
> work to a task.

It looks like even e.g. livepatch would set TIF_NOTIFY_SIGNAL, and
ignoring it could break livepatch for any code waiting e.g. in
tcp_sendmsg()?!?

This change looks scary to me.

I think what Pavel is suggesting is to refactor the KTLS code to ensure
all the writes are completed before releasing the last socket
reference.

I would second such suggestion.

If really nothing else works, and this change is the only option, try
to obtain an ack from kernel/signal.c maintainers.

Thanks,

Paolo