All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
	James Chapman <jchapman@katalix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] l2tp: use rcu_dereference_sk_user_data() in l2tp_udp_encap_recv()
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2019 20:21:10 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190424182108.GB17274@pc-2.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iJ9biqisZ3o_HUw=7cVWcUOD5XVjCg2F2FmAn67KTc8mQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 04:33:47AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 2:58 AM Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 09:43:26AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Canonical way to fetch sk_user_data from an encap_rcv() handler called
> > > from UDP stack in rcu protected section is to use rcu_dereference_sk_user_data(),
> > > otherwise compiler might read it multiple times.
> > >
> > That reminds me the more general problem we have with ->sk_user_data:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20180117.142538.1972806008716856078.davem@davemloft.net/
> >
> > We're not even guarateed that ->sk_user_data points to a struct l2tp_tunnel
> > (some external modules can still probably override it).
> >
> 
> RCU rules should prevail.
> 
> An RCU grace period must be enforced if the same UDP socket has its
> sk_user_data changed.
> 
> Normally, UDP socket observes an RCU grace period at close/destroy
> time. (SOCK_RCU_FREE)
> 
> If we detect the same UDP socket has not been closed between clearing
> sk_user_data
> and setting it again to a non NULL value, we must insert a synchronize_rcu()
> 
> A generic change could look like the following (but we must check that all
> rcu_assign_sk_user_data() callers can sleep)
> 
It seems that callers of rcu_assign_sk_user_data() can indeed sleep.

But I think we have more problems. Not all code paths treat
->sk_user_data as RCU pointers (IIUC that's why we created the
__sk_user_data() macro, instead of just redefining ->sk_user_data as
"void __rcu *"). But even if RCU rules were respected for all accesses,
we'd need to ensure consistent protection for the update side.

And then, we'd need to make sure that ->sk_user_data is in sync with
the encap_rcv() callback (or whatever actually uses the data pointed
to). Otherwise a module could treat ->sk_user_data as a struct foo
pointer while it actually points to a struct bar.

For example, a quick look at net/sunrpc/svcsock.c seems to indicate
that svc_addsock() would accept any (unconnected) UDP socket and pass
it to svc_addsock(), which in turn would override ->sk_user_data with
a struct svc_sock pointer. If the socket was previously set up by L2TP,
then we'd end up with ->sk_user_data pointing to a svc_sock structure,
but ->encap_rcv still pointing to l2tp_udp_encap_recv(). That's going
to give unexpected results when l2tp_udp_encap_recv() will dereference
->sk_user_data to access (what it believes to be) its tunnel structure.

> diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
> index 784cd19d5ff76b53865f79d4580f3fa269fa2408..3cf0dfd9d83a956220d69138339561b62407addd
> 100644
> --- a/include/net/sock.h
> +++ b/include/net/sock.h
> @@ -522,7 +522,6 @@ enum sk_pacing {
>  #define __sk_user_data(sk) ((*((void __rcu **)&(sk)->sk_user_data)))
> 
>  #define rcu_dereference_sk_user_data(sk)
> rcu_dereference(__sk_user_data((sk)))
> -#define rcu_assign_sk_user_data(sk, ptr)
> rcu_assign_pointer(__sk_user_data((sk)), ptr)
> 
>  /*
>   * SK_CAN_REUSE and SK_NO_REUSE on a socket mean that the socket is OK
> @@ -811,6 +810,7 @@ enum sock_flags {
>         SOCK_FILTER_LOCKED, /* Filter cannot be changed anymore */
>         SOCK_SELECT_ERR_QUEUE, /* Wake select on error queue */
>         SOCK_RCU_FREE, /* wait rcu grace period in sk_destruct() */
> +       SOCK_USER_DATA_SET,
>         SOCK_TXTIME,
>         SOCK_XDP, /* XDP is attached */
>         SOCK_TSTAMP_NEW, /* Indicates 64 bit timestamps always */
> @@ -2582,4 +2582,15 @@ static inline bool sk_dev_equal_l3scope(struct
> sock *sk, int dif)
>         return false;
>  }
> 
> +static inline void rcu_assign_sk_user_data(struct sock *sk, void *ptr)
> +{
> +       if (ptr) {
> +               might_sleep();
> +               if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_USER_DATA_SET))
> +                       synchronize_net();
> +       }
> +       rcu_assign_pointer(__sk_user_data((sk)), ptr);
> +       if (ptr)
> +               sock_set_flag(sk, SOCK_USER_DATA_SET);
> +}
>  #endif /* _SOCK_H */
> 
> 
> 
> > There were some locking rules defined for setting ->sk_user_data:
> > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20180124203541.3172-3-tom@quantonium.net/
> > Converting all users to either avoid using ->sk_user_data or using it
> > under the proper pre-conditions has been on my TODO list for a while...
> > I'll try to revive this effort.
> 
> Avoiding using sk_user_data seems not practical.
> 
> However making sure it is not blindly overwritten by a buggy module is doable.
> 
At least for those that use rcu_assign_sk_user_data(). And even then,
we'd need to ensure callers do properly validate the socket, to avoid
overriding ->sk_user_data with a different pointer type than what other
users expect.

> >
> > > Fixes: d00fa9adc528 ("il2tp: fix races with tunnel socket close")
> >                         ^
> > Spurious "i". Vi user? :)
> 
> I am not a vi user ;)
> 
So nice to hear :)

> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> > > Cc: James Chapman <jchapman@katalix.com>
> > > ---
> > >  net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c b/net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c
> > > index fed6becc5daf86afa2ad9188bb28e151244bb5a6..aee33d1320184e411dbedff72b5bf5199481e53f 100644
> > > --- a/net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c
> > > +++ b/net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c
> > > @@ -909,7 +909,7 @@ int l2tp_udp_encap_recv(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
> > >  {
> > >       struct l2tp_tunnel *tunnel;
> > >
> > > -     tunnel = l2tp_tunnel(sk);
> > > +     tunnel = rcu_dereference_sk_user_data(sk);
> > >       if (tunnel == NULL)
> > >               goto pass_up;
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.21.0.593.g511ec345e18-goog
> > >

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-24 18:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-23 16:43 [PATCH net] l2tp: use rcu_dereference_sk_user_data() in l2tp_udp_encap_recv() Eric Dumazet
2019-04-24  9:58 ` Guillaume Nault
2019-04-24 11:33   ` Eric Dumazet
2019-04-24 18:21     ` Guillaume Nault [this message]
2019-04-24 18:29       ` Eric Dumazet
2019-04-24 19:04         ` Guillaume Nault

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=20190424182108.GB17274@pc-2.home \
    --to=gnault@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=jchapman@katalix.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.