All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Antonio Quartulli <antonio@openvpn.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Hyunwoo Kim <imv4bel@gmail.com>,
	Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] ovpn: fix race between deleting interface and adding new peer
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 18:43:04 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260323184304.42c3930f@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260320100351.2283994-2-antonio@openvpn.net>

On Fri, 20 Mar 2026 11:03:51 +0100 Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> While deleting an existing ovpn interface, there is a very
> narrow window where adding a new peer via netlink may cause
> the netdevice to hang and prevent its unregistration.
> 
> It may happen during ovpn_dellink(), when all existing peers are
> freed and the device is queued for deregistration, but a
> CMD_PEER_NEW message comes in adding a new peer that takes again
> a reference to the netdev.
> 
> At this point there is no way to release the device because we are
> under the assumption that all peers were already released.
> 
> Fix the race condition by releasing all peers in ndo_uninit(),
> when the netdevice has already been removed from the netdev
> list and thus an incoming CMD_PEER_NEW cannot have any effect
> anymore.
> 
> At this point ovpn_dellink() becomes empty and can just be
> removed.

This looks like a step in the right direction but AI points out that
it's not enough:

Does this completely resolve the race condition?
If a CMD_PEER_NEW netlink message executes concurrently, could the
following sequence occur since ovpn_nl_family uses parallel_ops:
1. In ovpn_nl_pre_doit(), the netlink thread looks up the device via
   dev_get_by_index_rcu(), increments its reference count via netdev_hold(),
   and drops the RCU lock.
2. Concurrently, device unregistration unlists the device and calls
   synchronize_net(). Since the RCU lock in ovpn_nl_pre_doit() was dropped,
   unregistration proceeds without waiting for the netlink command.
3. Unregistration executes ndo_uninit() (ovpn_net_uninit()), which calls
   cancel_delayed_work_sync() and ovpn_peers_free(), emptying the interface.
4. The preempted CMD_PEER_NEW thread resumes and adds the new peer via
   ovpn_peer_add(). Because the device registration state isn't verified
   (e.g., checking if dev->reg_state == NETREG_REGISTERED), the peer is
   added to the cleared hash tables.
If this sequence happens, wouldn't it cause a permanent hang for UDP sockets?
ovpn_socket_new() acquires a permanent netdev reference. Since
ovpn_peers_free() already ran, this peer is never removed, causing
netdev_wait_allrefs() to hang the kernel indefinitely.
Additionally, for TCP sockets, the keepalive timer would be re-armed
after being canceled here, leading to a use-after-free when the timer
eventually fires on the freed device memory.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-24  1:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-20 10:03 [PATCH net 0/1] pull request: fixes for ovpn 2026-03-20 Antonio Quartulli
2026-03-20 10:03 ` [PATCH net 1/1] ovpn: fix race between deleting interface and adding new peer Antonio Quartulli
2026-03-24  1:43   ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-03-24  1:45     ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-24 10:09       ` Sabrina Dubroca
2026-03-24 21:30         ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-24 22:40           ` Sabrina Dubroca
2026-03-25 13:37             ` Antonio Quartulli
2026-03-26  9:13               ` Sabrina Dubroca
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2026-04-22 12:32 [PATCH net 0/1] pull request: fixes for ovpn 2026-04-22 Antonio Quartulli
2026-04-22 12:32 ` [PATCH net 1/1] ovpn: fix race between deleting interface and adding new peer Antonio Quartulli
2026-04-23  2:20   ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-23 12:16     ` Antonio Quartulli
2026-04-23 13:43       ` Antonio Quartulli
2026-04-23 16:37         ` Sabrina Dubroca
2026-04-23 17:36           ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-23 22:27             ` Sabrina Dubroca
2026-04-27 20:22               ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-04-23 17:38       ` Jakub Kicinski

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=20260323184304.42c3930f@kernel.org \
    --to=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
    --cc=antonio@openvpn.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=imv4bel@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=sd@queasysnail.net \
    /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.