[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20260118170803.GC13201@unreal>
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2026 19:08:03 +0200
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: "Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> Leon Romanovsky <leonro@...dia.com> Shannon Nelson <shannon.nelson@...cle.com> Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com> Yossef Efraim" <yossefe@...lanox.com>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: xfrm: Possible refcount bug in xfrm_dev_state_add() ?
On Sat, Jan 17, 2026 at 08:00:16PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Just browsing call trace for
>
> unregister_netdevice: waiting for netdevsim0 to become free. Usage count = 2
> ref_tracker: netdev@...f888052f24618 has 1/1 users at
> __netdev_tracker_alloc include/linux/netdevice.h:4400 [inline]
> netdev_tracker_alloc include/linux/netdevice.h:4412 [inline]
> xfrm_dev_state_add+0x3a5/0x1080 net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c:316
> xfrm_state_construct net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c:986 [inline]
> xfrm_add_sa+0x34ff/0x5fa0 net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c:1022
> xfrm_user_rcv_msg+0x58e/0xc00 net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c:3507
> netlink_rcv_skb+0x158/0x420 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2550
> xfrm_netlink_rcv+0x71/0x90 net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c:3529
> netlink_unicast_kernel net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1318 [inline]
> netlink_unicast+0x5aa/0x870 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1344
> netlink_sendmsg+0x8c8/0xdd0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1894
> sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:727 [inline]
> __sock_sendmsg net/socket.c:742 [inline]
> ____sys_sendmsg+0xa5d/0xc30 net/socket.c:2592
> ___sys_sendmsg+0x134/0x1d0 net/socket.c:2646
> __sys_sendmsg+0x16d/0x220 net/socket.c:2678
> do_syscall_x64 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:63 [inline]
> do_syscall_64+0xcd/0xf80 arch/x86/entry/syscall_64.c:94
> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x77/0x7f
>
> problem, I noticed a different-but-possible refcount bug.
>
> Commit 67a63387b141 ("xfrm: Fix negative device refcount on offload failure.")
> resets xso->dev to NULL. Commit 50bd870a9e5c ("xfrm: Add ESN support for IPSec
> HW offload") also resets xso->dev to NULL. Then, why not commit 585b64f5a620
> ("xfrm: delay initialization of offload path till its actually requested") also
> resets xso->dev to NULL (like shown below) ? (Note that I don't know the
> background of these commits...)
>
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> index 52ae0e034d29..daa640f1ff9c 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c
> @@ -308,6 +308,7 @@ int xfrm_dev_state_add(struct net *net, struct xfrm_state *x,
>
> if (!x->type_offload) {
> NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "Type doesn't support offload");
> + xso->dev = NULL;
I do not expect this change to have any visible impact. After this failure,
the xso object should not be reused, so setting "xso->dev = NULL" is likely
unnecessary as well.
Thanks
> dev_put(dev);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists