From: Alexandra Winter <wintera@linux.ibm.com>
To: hexlabsecurity@proton.me, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Thorsten Winkler <twinkler@linux.ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Hidayath Khan <hidayath@linux.ibm.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
Ursula Braun <ursula.braun@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 0/3] net/iucv: fix the recvmsg window update
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 15:08:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8b840ef9-6c50-4f0f-a04c-2dca3f5f40c0@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260821-b4-disp-3a6e8695-v2-0-37597ff723a8@proton.me>
On 21.08.26 13:17, Bryam Vargas via B4 Relay wrote:
> v2 answers Jakub's reviews of v1 with changes rather than replies.
>
> 1/3 keeps its hunk and states the impact properly. SO_MSGLIMIT accepts 1,
> which makes msglimit / 2 zero, and msg_recv never leaves zero on a classic
> socket, so the NULL read is one recvmsg() away for an unprivileged process
> on a socket of its own. With relocate_lowcore it faults.
>
> Its Fixes: tag was wrong as well. The unconditional send does date to
> 3881ac441f64, but iucv_send_ctrl() sized the skb with a constant ETH_HLEN
> until 238965b71b96, so before that it just returned -ENODEV. Backport
> window is v5.3, not v3.1.
>
> 2/3 is new. v1 admitted it widened the msg_recv race and left it open,
> which isn't good enough under Cc: stable. afiucv_hs_send() samples the
> counter and settles it after dev_queue_xmit(); sendmsg reaches that under
> lock_sock() and recvmsg reaches it under no socket lock, so the two don't
> exclude each other and both can subtract the same value. Negative counter,
> WARN_ON, and the same credit advertised twice to a peer whose
> afiucv_hs_callback_win() subtracts the wire value from msg_sent unchecked.
>
> Taking the socket lock around the deferred send would close it too, since
> recvmsg is the only unlocked side. I didn't: recvmsg has never held that
> lock, and making it do so changes the receive path for every caller. That
> belongs in the locking rework, not in a stable fix.
>
> The claim sits after the last error exit rather than in the header build,
> so the counter reads zero only while the transmit is in flight, and a
> concurrent sender isn't talked out of its own update.
>
> 3/3 is v1's patch, and it must not be applied without 2/3: hoisting the
> send out of message_q.lock drops the serialisation that lock gave two
> concurrent recvmsg(). Backported alone it recreates what 2/3 fixes. Both
> changelogs say so.
>
> Litmus test under LKMM: the counter reaches -2 before 2/3 and cannot after.
> No hardware run; I have no IBM Z, and CONFIG_AFIUCV is s390-only.
>
> The unlocked hs_dev and sk_shutdown window, the unbounded backlog_skb_q and
> the WARN_ON a flooding peer can reach are pre-existing and wider than this
> series. They belong with the locking rework Alexandra has open.
>
> Thanks for the reviews.
>
> ---
> Bryam Vargas (3):
> net/iucv: only send the window update on HiperSockets sockets
> net/iucv: claim the receive credit atomically
> net/iucv: send the window update outside message_q.lock
>
> net/iucv/af_iucv.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> ---
> base-commit: 746fc0787f616da418ffc04a110296fe95d53491
> change-id: 20260821-b4-disp-3a6e8695-c1f4a6069169
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Bryam Vargas <hexlabsecurity@proton.me>
>
>
>
Thank you for the fixes Bryam.
I have reviewed them and would technically give an R-b to all three.
However I propose to send them again as one single patch. They are
really about the same subject: iucv->msg_recv handling and even have
a dependency, as you rightfully noted.
It will be much easier to proceed and to backport them, if it is only
one patch.
I know it's a tradeoff, but I think we will do ourselves and the
upstream maintainers a favor, if we send not too small fragments
of fixes.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-24 13:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-21 11:17 [PATCH net v2 0/3] net/iucv: fix the recvmsg window update Bryam Vargas via B4 Relay
2026-08-21 11:17 ` Bryam Vargas
2026-08-21 11:17 ` [PATCH net v2 1/3] net/iucv: only send the window update on HiperSockets sockets Bryam Vargas via B4 Relay
2026-08-21 11:17 ` Bryam Vargas
2026-08-22 11:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-28 10:05 ` Alexandra Winter
2026-08-21 11:17 ` [PATCH net v2 2/3] net/iucv: claim the receive credit atomically Bryam Vargas via B4 Relay
2026-08-21 11:17 ` Bryam Vargas
2026-08-22 11:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-21 11:17 ` [PATCH net v2 3/3] net/iucv: send the window update outside message_q.lock Bryam Vargas via B4 Relay
2026-08-21 11:17 ` Bryam Vargas
2026-08-22 11:17 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-24 12:58 ` Alexandra Winter
2026-08-24 13:08 ` Alexandra Winter [this message]
2026-08-25 13:17 ` [PATCH net v2 0/3] net/iucv: fix the recvmsg window update Aswin Karuvally
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=8b840ef9-6c50-4f0f-a04c-2dca3f5f40c0@linux.ibm.com \
--to=wintera@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hexlabsecurity@proton.me \
--cc=hidayath@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=twinkler@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ursula.braun@de.ibm.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.