| 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: <20241105080305.717508-1-wangliang74@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2024 16:03:05 +0800
From: Wang Liang <wangliang74@...wei.com>
To: <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
<pabeni@...hat.com>, <horms@...nel.org>, <dsahern@...nel.org>,
<kuniyu@...zon.com>, <luoxuanqiang@...inos.cn>, <kernelxing@...cent.com>,
<wangliang74@...wei.com>, <kirjanov@...il.com>
CC: <yuehaibing@...wei.com>, <zhangchangzhong@...wei.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [RFC PATCH net v2] net: fix data-races around sk->sk_forward_alloc
Syzkaller reported this warning:
------------[ cut here ]------------
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 16 at net/ipv4/af_inet.c:156 inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0
Modules linked in:
CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 16 Comm: ksoftirqd/0 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc5 #26
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.15.0-1 04/01/2014
RIP: 0010:inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0
Code: 24 12 4c 89 e2 5b 48 c7 c7 98 ec bb 82 41 5c e9 d1 18 17 ff 4c 89 e6 5b 48 c7 c7 d0 ec bb 82 41 5c e9 bf 18 17 ff 0f 0b eb 83 <0f> 0b eb 97 0f 0b eb 87 0f 0b e9 68 ff ff ff 66 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00
RSP: 0018:ffffc9000008bd90 EFLAGS: 00010206
RAX: 0000000000000300 RBX: ffff88810b172a90 RCX: 0000000000000007
RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: 0000000000000300 RDI: ffff88810b172a00
RBP: ffff88810b172a00 R08: ffff888104273c00 R09: 0000000000100007
R10: 0000000000020000 R11: 0000000000000006 R12: ffff88810b172a00
R13: 0000000000000004 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: ffff888237c31f78
FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff888237c00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
CR2: 00007ffc63fecac8 CR3: 000000000342e000 CR4: 00000000000006f0
DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
Call Trace:
<TASK>
? __warn+0x88/0x130
? inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0
? report_bug+0x18e/0x1a0
? handle_bug+0x53/0x90
? exc_invalid_op+0x18/0x70
? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20
? inet_sock_destruct+0x1c5/0x1e0
__sk_destruct+0x2a/0x200
rcu_do_batch+0x1aa/0x530
? rcu_do_batch+0x13b/0x530
rcu_core+0x159/0x2f0
handle_softirqs+0xd3/0x2b0
? __pfx_smpboot_thread_fn+0x10/0x10
run_ksoftirqd+0x25/0x30
smpboot_thread_fn+0xdd/0x1d0
kthread+0xd3/0x100
? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
ret_from_fork+0x34/0x50
? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30
</TASK>
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
Its possible that two threads call tcp_v6_do_rcv()/sk_forward_alloc_add()
concurrently when sk->sk_state == TCP_LISTEN with sk->sk_lock unlocked,
which triggers a data-race around sk->sk_forward_alloc:
tcp_v6_rcv
tcp_v6_do_rcv
skb_clone_and_charge_r
sk_rmem_schedule
__sk_mem_schedule
sk_forward_alloc_add()
skb_set_owner_r
sk_mem_charge
sk_forward_alloc_add()
__kfree_skb
skb_release_all
skb_release_head_state
sock_rfree
sk_mem_uncharge
sk_forward_alloc_add()
sk_mem_reclaim
// set local var reclaimable
__sk_mem_reclaim
sk_forward_alloc_add()
In this syzkaller testcase, two threads call
tcp_v6_do_rcv() with skb->truesize=768, the sk_forward_alloc changes like
this:
(cpu 1) | (cpu 2) | sk_forward_alloc
... | ... | 0
__sk_mem_schedule() | | +4096 = 4096
| __sk_mem_schedule() | +4096 = 8192
sk_mem_charge() | | -768 = 7424
| sk_mem_charge() | -768 = 6656
... | ... |
sk_mem_uncharge() | | +768 = 7424
reclaimable=7424 | |
| sk_mem_uncharge() | +768 = 8192
| reclaimable=8192 |
__sk_mem_reclaim() | | -4096 = 4096
| __sk_mem_reclaim() | -8192 = -4096 != 0
The skb_clone_and_charge_r() should not be called in tcp_v6_do_rcv() when
sk->sk_state is TCP_LISTEN, it happens later in tcp_v6_syn_recv_sock().
Fix the same issue in dccp_v6_do_rcv().
Suggested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Fixes: e994b2f0fb92 ("tcp: do not lock listener to process SYN packets")
Signed-off-by: Wang Liang <wangliang74@...wei.com>
---
net/dccp/ipv6.c | 2 +-
net/ipv6/tcp_ipv6.c | 4 +---
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/dccp/ipv6.c b/net/dccp/ipv6.c
index da5dba120bc9..d6649246188d 100644
--- a/net/dccp/ipv6.c
+++ b/net/dccp/ipv6.c
@@ -618,7 +618,7 @@ static int dccp_v6_do_rcv(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
by tcp. Feel free to propose better solution.
--ANK (980728)
*/
- if (np->rxopt.all)
+ if (np->rxopt.all && sk->sk_state != DCCP_LISTEN)
opt_skb = skb_clone_and_charge_r(skb, sk);
if (sk->sk_state == DCCP_OPEN) { /* Fast path */
diff --git a/net/ipv6/tcp_ipv6.c b/net/ipv6/tcp_ipv6.c
index d71ab4e1efe1..c9de5ef8f267 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/tcp_ipv6.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/tcp_ipv6.c
@@ -1618,7 +1618,7 @@ int tcp_v6_do_rcv(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
by tcp. Feel free to propose better solution.
--ANK (980728)
*/
- if (np->rxopt.all)
+ if (np->rxopt.all && sk->sk_state != TCP_LISTEN)
opt_skb = skb_clone_and_charge_r(skb, sk);
if (sk->sk_state == TCP_ESTABLISHED) { /* Fast path */
@@ -1656,8 +1656,6 @@ int tcp_v6_do_rcv(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
if (reason)
goto reset;
}
- if (opt_skb)
- __kfree_skb(opt_skb);
return 0;
}
} else
--
2.34.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists