From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Wei Wang <weiwan@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] sctp: suspicious rcu_read_lock() in sctp_packet_config()
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 16:28:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171017162826.GB5357@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADvbK_dRBaOLzrXWS2ndHu3sz9LB87rJsyGog2BjishapiMhxw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 11:31:30PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:45 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > SCTP experts.
> >
> > syszkaller reported a few crashes in sctp_packet_config() with invalid
> > access to a deleted dst.
> >
> > The rcu_read_lock() in sctp_packet_config() is suspect.
> >
> > It does not protect anything at the moment.
> >
> > If we expect tp->dst to be manipulated/changed by another cpu/thread,
> > then we need proper rcu protection.
> >
> > Following patch to show what would be a minimal change (but obviously
> > bigger changes are needed, like sctp_transport_pmtu_check() and
> > sctp_transport_dst_check(), and proper sparse annotations)
> will check all places accessing tp->dst in sctp.
I checked some and sctp_transport_dst_check() should be fine because
by then we are holding a reference on dst. Same goes to
sctp_transport_pmtu_check(). It's not possible that these would trip
on the update going on on sctp_packet_config() because the socket is
locked. We may not need (much) more than the example patch, I think.
A more thorough check is certainly welcomed, indeed.
Marcelo
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
To: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Wei Wang <weiwan@google.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] sctp: suspicious rcu_read_lock() in sctp_packet_config()
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2017 14:28:26 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171017162826.GB5357@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADvbK_dRBaOLzrXWS2ndHu3sz9LB87rJsyGog2BjishapiMhxw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 11:31:30PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 9:45 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> > SCTP experts.
> >
> > syszkaller reported a few crashes in sctp_packet_config() with invalid
> > access to a deleted dst.
> >
> > The rcu_read_lock() in sctp_packet_config() is suspect.
> >
> > It does not protect anything at the moment.
> >
> > If we expect tp->dst to be manipulated/changed by another cpu/thread,
> > then we need proper rcu protection.
> >
> > Following patch to show what would be a minimal change (but obviously
> > bigger changes are needed, like sctp_transport_pmtu_check() and
> > sctp_transport_dst_check(), and proper sparse annotations)
> will check all places accessing tp->dst in sctp.
I checked some and sctp_transport_dst_check() should be fine because
by then we are holding a reference on dst. Same goes to
sctp_transport_pmtu_check(). It's not possible that these would trip
on the update going on on sctp_packet_config() because the socket is
locked. We may not need (much) more than the example patch, I think.
A more thorough check is certainly welcomed, indeed.
Marcelo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-17 16:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-17 13:45 [RFC] sctp: suspicious rcu_read_lock() in sctp_packet_config() Eric Dumazet
2017-10-17 15:31 ` Xin Long
2017-10-17 15:31 ` Xin Long
2017-10-17 16:28 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner [this message]
2017-10-17 16:28 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2017-10-17 16:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-10-17 16:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-10-17 17:01 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2017-10-17 17:01 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2017-10-17 17:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-10-17 17:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-10-17 17:27 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2017-10-17 17:27 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2017-10-17 17:33 ` Xin Long
2017-10-17 17:33 ` Xin Long
2017-10-18 10:01 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2017-10-18 10:01 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171017162826.GB5357@localhost.localdomain \
--to=marcelo.leitner@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lucien.xin@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=vyasevich@gmail.com \
--cc=weiwan@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.