netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH] net: Fix one page_pool page leak from skb_frag

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHS8izO2PT3ZrDdHhNOZ7+AL_SKZfDko9ZUWuTd8O84bjOVDHg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 09:23:20 -0700
From: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@...dia.com>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	"ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org" <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>, 
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"jacob.e.keller@...el.com" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>, 
	Jianbo Liu <jianbol@...dia.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] net: Fix one page_pool page leak from skb_frag_unref

On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 7:24 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 1 May 2024 00:48:43 -0700 Mina Almasry wrote:
> > > 1) Revert commit 2cc3aeb5eccc
> > > ("skbuff: Fix a potential race while recycling page_pool packets"). I tested
> > > this btw and it works (for this specific scenario).
> > >
> > > 2) Revert Mina's commit a580ea994fd3 ("net: mirror skb frag ref/unref helpers")
> > > for now.
> >
> > I vote for #1, and IIUC Jakub's feedback, he seems to prefer this as
> > well.
>
> I vote #2, actually :( Or #3 make page pool ref safe to acquire
> concurrently, but that plus fixing all the places where we do crazy
> things may be tricky.
>
> Even taking the ref is not as simple as using atomic_long_inc_not_zero()
> sadly, partly because we try to keep the refcount at one, in an apparent
> attempt to avoid dirtying the cache line twice.
>
> So maybe partial revert to stop be bleeding and retry after more testing
> is the way to go?
>

OK, I will upload a revert sometime today.

> I had a quick look at the code and there is also a bunch of functions
> which "shift" frags from one skb to another, without checking whether
> the pp_recycle state matches.

You posted a diff, I will pick it up in a separate patch.

-- 
Thanks,
Mina