netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: devmem: fix kernel panic when socket close after module unload

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: <20250415195926.1c3f8aff@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2025 19:59:26 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com>
Cc: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>, Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>,
 davem@...emloft.net, pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
 andrew+netdev@...n.ch, horms@...nel.org, asml.silence@...il.com,
 dw@...idwei.uk, sdf@...ichev.me, skhawaja@...gle.com,
 simona.vetter@...ll.ch, kaiyuanz@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: devmem: fix kernel panic when socket close
 after module unload

On Tue, 15 Apr 2025 11:59:40 -0700 Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > commit 42f342387841 ("net: fix use-after-free in the
> > netdev_nl_sock_priv_destroy()") and rolling back a few fixes, it's
> > really introduced by commit 1d22d3060b9b ("net: drop rtnl_lock for
> > queue_mgmt operations").
> > 
> > My first question, does this issue still reproduce if you remove the
> > per netdev locking and go back to relying on rtnl_locking? Or do we
> > crash somewhere else in net_devmem_unbind_dmabuf? If so, where?
> > Looking through the rest of the unbinding code, it's not clear to me
> > any of it actually uses dev, so it may just be the locking...  
>  
> A proper fix, most likely, will involve resetting binding->dev to NULL
> when the device is going away.

Right, tho a bit of work and tricky handling will be necessary to get
that right. We're not holding a ref on binding->dev.

I think we need to invert the socket mutex vs instance lock ordering.
Make the priv mutex protect the binding->list and binding->dev.
For that to work the binding needs to also store a pointer to its
owning socket?

Then in both uninstall paths (from socket and from netdev unreg) we can
take the socket mutex, delete from list, clear the ->dev pointer,
unlock, release the ref on the binding.

The socket close path would probably need to lock the socket, look at 
the first entry, if entry has ->dev call netdev_hold(), release the
socket, lock the netdev, lock the socket again, look at the ->dev, if
NULL we raced - done. If not NULL release the socket, call unbind.
netdev_put(). Restart this paragraph.

I can't think of an easier way.

> Replacing rtnl with dev lock exposes the fact that we can't assume
> that the binding->dev is still valid by the time we do unbind.

Note that binding->dev is never accessed by net_devmem_unbind_dmabuf().
So if the device was unregistered and its queues flushed, the only thing
we touch the netdev pointer for is the instance lock :(