All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>,
	Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH 5.15.y 7/9] can: bcm: fix stale rx/tx ops after device removal
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2026 12:21:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260724102149.16440-7-socketcan@hartkopp.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260724102149.16440-1-socketcan@hartkopp.net>

commit 3b762c0d950383ab7a002686c9136b9aa55d2d70 upstream.

RX: an RX_SETUP update(!) for an existing op skipped can_rx_register()
unconditionally, even when a concurrent NETDEV_UNREGISTER had already
torn down its registration (op->rx_reg_dev == NULL). This silently
did not re-enable frame delivery for that updated filter. bcm_rx_setup()
now re-registers in that case, while leaving rx_ops with ifindex = 0
(all CAN devices) which never carry a tracked rx_reg_dev registered as-is.

TX: bcm_notify() only handled bo->rx_ops on NETDEV_UNREGISTER, leaving
tx_ops with an active cyclic transmission re-arming its hrtimer
indefinitely to execute bcm_tx_timeout_handler(). Cancelling the hrtimer
prevents the runaway timer and any injection into a later reused ifindex,
since nothing else calls bcm_can_tx() for the op until an explicit
TX_SETUP update re-arms it.

Unlike bcm_rx_unreg(), which clears the tracked rx_reg_dev for rx_ops,
the ifindex is intentionally left unchanged for tx_ops. bcm_tx_setup()
always rejects ifindex 0, so clearing it would strand the op: neither a
later TX_SETUP (bcm_find_op()) nor TX_DELETE (bcm_delete_tx_op()) could
ever find it again, since both require an exact ifindex match.

Reported-by: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20260708094536.DDF821F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org/
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20260708154039.347ED1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org/
Fixes: ffd980f976e7 ("[CAN]: Add broadcast manager (bcm) protocol")
Signed-off-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260714-bcm_fixes-v15-9-562f7e3e42da@hartkopp.net
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
---
 net/can/bcm.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/can/bcm.c b/net/can/bcm.c
index eb09818..4afc2ed 100644
--- a/net/can/bcm.c
+++ b/net/can/bcm.c
@@ -1234,6 +1234,7 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 	struct bcm_sock *bo = bcm_sk(sk);
 	struct bcm_op *op;
 	int do_rx_register;
+	int new_op = 0;
 	int err = 0;
 
 	if ((msg_head->flags & RX_FILTER_ID) || (!(msg_head->nframes))) {
@@ -1318,8 +1319,15 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 		/* free temporary frames / kfree(NULL) is safe */
 		kfree(new_frames);
 
-		/* Only an update -> do not call can_rx_register() */
-		do_rx_register = 0;
+		/* Don't register a new CAN filter for the rx_op update unless
+		 * a concurrent NETDEV_UNREGISTER notifier already tore down
+		 * the previous registration. In this case the receiver needs
+		 * to be re-registered here so that this update doesn't
+		 * silently stop delivering frames for the given ifindex.
+		 * Ops with ifindex = 0 (all CAN interfaces) never carry a
+		 * tracked rx_reg_dev and stay registered as-is.
+		 */
+		do_rx_register = (ifindex && !op->rx_reg_dev) ? 1 : 0;
 
 	} else {
 		/* insert new BCM operation for the given can_id */
@@ -1389,6 +1397,7 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 
 		/* call can_rx_register() */
 		do_rx_register = 1;
+		new_op = 1;
 
 	} /* if ((op = bcm_find_op(&bo->rx_ops, msg_head->can_id, ifindex))) */
 
@@ -1402,7 +1411,7 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 		if (op->flags & SETTIMER) {
 
 			/* set timers (locked) for newly created op */
-			if (do_rx_register) {
+			if (new_op) {
 				spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
 				op->ival1 = msg_head->ival1;
 				op->ival2 = msg_head->ival2;
@@ -1432,7 +1441,10 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 				      HRTIMER_MODE_REL_SOFT);
 	}
 
-	/* now we can register for can_ids, if we added a new bcm_op */
+	/* now we can register for can_ids, if we added a new bcm_op
+	 * or need to re-register after a NETDEV_UNREGISTER tore down
+	 * the previous registration of an existing op
+	 */
 	if (do_rx_register) {
 		if (ifindex) {
 			struct net_device *dev;
@@ -1462,18 +1474,32 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
 				err = -ENODEV;
 			}
 
-		} else
+		} else {
 			err = can_rx_register(sock_net(sk), NULL, op->can_id,
 					      REGMASK(op->can_id),
 					      bcm_rx_handler, op, "bcm", sk);
+		}
+
 		if (err) {
-			/* this bcm rx op is broken -> remove it */
-			bcm_remove_op(op);
+			/* newly created bcm rx op is broken -> remove it */
+			if (new_op) {
+				bcm_remove_op(op);
+				return err;
+			}
+
+			/* an existing op just stays unregistered.
+			 * Cancel op->timer and (defensively) op->thrtimer.
+			 * Other settings can't be reached until the next
+			 * successful RX_SETUP.
+			 */
+			hrtimer_cancel(&op->timer);
+			hrtimer_cancel(&op->thrtimer);
 			return err;
 		}
 
-		/* add this bcm_op to the list of the rx_ops */
-		list_add_rcu(&op->list, &bo->rx_ops);
+		/* add a new bcm_op to the list of the rx_ops */
+		if (new_op)
+			list_add_rcu(&op->list, &bo->rx_ops);
 	}
 
 	return msg_head->nframes * op->cfsiz + MHSIZ;
@@ -1689,11 +1715,19 @@ static void bcm_notify(struct bcm_sock *bo, unsigned long msg,
 	case NETDEV_UNREGISTER:
 		lock_sock(sk);
 
-		/* remove device specific receive entries */
+		/* rx_ops: remove device specific receive entries */
 		list_for_each_entry(op, &bo->rx_ops, list)
 			if (op->rx_reg_dev == dev)
 				bcm_rx_unreg(dev, op);
 
+		/* tx_ops: stop device specific cyclic transmissions on the
+		 * vanishing ifindex. Cancelling the timer is enough to stop
+		 * cyclic bcm_can_tx() calls as there is no re-arming.
+		 */
+		list_for_each_entry(op, &bo->tx_ops, list)
+			if (op->ifindex == dev->ifindex)
+				hrtimer_cancel(&op->timer);
+
 		/* remove device reference, if this is our bound device */
 		if (bo->bound && bo->ifindex == dev->ifindex) {
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PROC_FS)
-- 
2.43.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-07-24 10:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-20 15:12 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree gregkh
2026-07-24  8:37 ` [PATCH 1/9] can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-24 10:21 ` [PATCH 5.15.y " Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-24 10:21   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 2/9] can: bcm: add locking when updating filter and timer values Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-24 10:21   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 3/9] can: bcm: fix CAN frame rx/tx statistics Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-24 10:21   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 4/9] can: bcm: extend bcm_tx_lock usage for data and timer updates Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-24 10:21   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 5/9] can: bcm: validate frame length in bcm_rx_setup() for RTR replies Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-24 10:21   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 6/9] can: bcm: add missing device refcount for CAN filter removal Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-24 10:21   ` Oliver Hartkopp [this message]
2026-07-24 10:21   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 8/9] can: bcm: fix data race on rx_stamp/rx_ifindex in bcm_rx_handler() Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-24 10:21   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 9/9] can: bcm: track a single source interface for ANYDEV timeout/throttle ops Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-28 16:09   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 1/9] can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF Sasha Levin
2026-07-28 16:47     ` Oliver Hartkopp

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=20260724102149.16440-7-socketcan@hartkopp.net \
    --to=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
    --cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=stable@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.