[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250515055356.bgevcqwkyv3q7acr@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 22:53:56 -0700
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@...ux.dev>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>,
Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v5] bpf, sockmap: avoid using sk_socket after
free when sending
On 2025-05-08 14:18:25, Jiayuan Chen wrote:
> The sk->sk_socket is not locked or referenced in backlog thread, and
> during the call to skb_send_sock(), there is a race condition with
> the release of sk_socket. All types of sockets(tcp/udp/unix/vsock)
> will be affected.
>
> Race conditions:
> '''
> CPU0 CPU1
>
> backlog::skb_send_sock
> sendmsg_unlocked
> sock_sendmsg
> sock_sendmsg_nosec
> close(fd):
> ...
> ops->release() -> sock_map_close()
> sk_socket->ops = NULL
> free(socket)
> sock->ops->sendmsg
> ^
> panic here
> '''
>
> The ref of psock become 0 after sock_map_close() executed.
> '''
> void sock_map_close()
> {
> ...
> if (likely(psock)) {
> ...
> // !! here we remove psock and the ref of psock become 0
> sock_map_remove_links(sk, psock)
> psock = sk_psock_get(sk);
> if (unlikely(!psock))
> goto no_psock; <=== Control jumps here via goto
> ...
> cancel_delayed_work_sync(&psock->work); <=== not executed
> sk_psock_put(sk, psock);
> ...
> }
> '''
>
> Based on the fact that we already wait for the workqueue to finish in
> sock_map_close() if psock is held, we simply increase the psock
> reference count to avoid race conditions.
>
> With this patch, if the backlog thread is running, sock_map_close() will
> wait for the backlog thread to complete and cancel all pending work.
>
> If no backlog running, any pending work that hasn't started by then will
> fail when invoked by sk_psock_get(), as the psock reference count have
> been zeroed, and sk_psock_drop() will cancel all jobs via
> cancel_delayed_work_sync().
>
> In summary, we require synchronization to coordinate the backlog thread
> and close() thread.
>
> The panic I catched:
> '''
> Workqueue: events sk_psock_backlog
> RIP: 0010:sock_sendmsg+0x21d/0x440
> RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffc9000521fad8 RCX: 0000000000000001
> ...
> Call Trace:
> <TASK>
> ? die_addr+0x40/0xa0
> ? exc_general_protection+0x14c/0x230
> ? asm_exc_general_protection+0x26/0x30
> ? sock_sendmsg+0x21d/0x440
> ? sock_sendmsg+0x3e0/0x440
> ? __pfx_sock_sendmsg+0x10/0x10
> __skb_send_sock+0x543/0xb70
> sk_psock_backlog+0x247/0xb80
> ...
> '''
>
> Reported-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>
> Fixes: 799aa7f98d53 ("skmsg: Avoid lock_sock() in sk_psock_backlog()")
> Signed-off-by: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@...ux.dev>
Is the fixes tag actually,
4b4647add7d3c sock_map: avoid race between sock_map_close and sk_psock_put
Before that we should call the cancel correctly?
Thanks,
John
Powered by blists - more mailing lists