All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: rrobaina@redhat.com
Cc: 'Simon Horman' <horms@kernel.org>,
	audit@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, paul@paul-moore.com, eparis@redhat.com,
	edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
	sgrubb@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] netlink, audit: prevent false ENOBUFS on timeout expiry
Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 12:03:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260518110345.497489-1-horms@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260513172443.1128496-1-rrobaina@redhat.com>

From: 'Simon Horman' <horms@kernel.org>

This is an AI-generated review of your patch. The human sending this
email has considered the AI review valid, or at least plausible.
Full review at: https://sashiko.dev
---
netlink, audit: prevent false ENOBUFS on timeout expiry

This commit modifies netlink_unicast() to return -EAGAIN when a blocking
sender's timeout expires. This bypasses the netlink_overrun() call to
allow the audit subsystem to gracefully enqueue the pending event into its
internal backlog without falsely returning ENOBUFS to user-space.

> diff --git a/net/netlink/af_netlink.c b/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
> --- a/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
> +++ b/net/netlink/af_netlink.c
> @@ -1351,8 +1351,18 @@ int netlink_unicast(struct sock *ssk, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  	}
>  
>  	err = netlink_attachskb(sk, skb, &timeo, ssk);
> -	if (err == 1)
> +	if (err == 1) {
> +		/* timeo may have been zeroed by schedule_timeout inside
> +		 * netlink_attachskb. If the caller is a timed-blocking sender
> +		 * (not genuinely nonblocking), don't re-enter with timeo=0 as
> +		 * that would misfire netlink_overrun on the next iteration.
> +		 */
> +		if (timeo == 0 && !nonblock) {
> +			kfree_skb(skb);
> +			return -EAGAIN;

Could this regression cause silent packet drops in non-audit subsystems?

While this change prevents false ENOBUFS for the audit subsystem, other
subsystems like InfiniBand's IWPM use rdma_nl_unicast_wait(), which sets
nonblock=0 and operates on a kernel socket with a timeout.

If the timeout expires because the receiving user-space daemon is
bottlenecked, this new path will free the skb and return -EAGAIN without
ever invoking netlink_overrun().

Without netlink_overrun(), the receiver's socket error is never set to
ENOBUFS. Would this prevent user-space from being notified of the dropped
message, leading to permanent state desynchronization between the kernel
and user-space?

> +		}
>  		goto retry;
> +	}
>  	if (err)
>  		return err;

  reply	other threads:[~2026-05-18 11:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-13 17:24 [PATCH v2] netlink, audit: prevent false ENOBUFS on timeout expiry Ricardo Robaina
2026-05-18 11:03 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2026-05-27 19:26   ` Ricardo Robaina
2026-05-19  0:35 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-26 20:53   ` Paul Moore
2026-05-27 19:34     ` Ricardo Robaina
2026-05-27 19:29   ` Ricardo Robaina
2026-05-27 22:29     ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-05-28 22:40       ` Steve Grubb
2026-05-28 23:29         ` 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=20260518110345.497489-1-horms@kernel.org \
    --to=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=audit@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=eparis@redhat.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
    --cc=rrobaina@redhat.com \
    --cc=sgrubb@redhat.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.