From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Jason Xing" <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v5 6/8] xsk: avoid skb leak in XDP_TX_METADATA case
Date: Sun, 03 May 2026 20:09:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260503200927.73EA1C2BCB4@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260502200722.53960-7-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Critical] Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) vulnerability on shared UMEM metadata allows bypassing checksum bounds validation.
- [High] Leaked `xsk_addrs` structure in the non-zerocopy `xsk_build_skb()` error path when page allocation fails.
--
commit f1079e9399771f267ff5b6767db05016e5ee4840
Author: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>
xsk: avoid skb leak in XDP_TX_METADATA case
This commit fixes an skb leak in the XDP_TX_METADATA case by explicitly adding
kfree_skb() before returning back to its caller. The issue happens when
xsk_skb_metadata() returns an error, leading the caller to clear the skb
without freeing it.
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260415085204.3F87AC19424@smtp.kernel.org/
> diff --git a/net/xdp/xsk.c b/net/xdp/xsk.c
> index af3c5752bb63..770ba4695a9d 100644
> --- a/net/xdp/xsk.c
> +++ b/net/xdp/xsk.c
> @@ -821,8 +821,10 @@ static struct sk_buff *xsk_build_skb_zerocopy(struct xdp_sock *xs,
> skb_reserve(skb, hr);
> if (desc->options & XDP_TX_METADATA) {
> err = xsk_skb_metadata(skb, buffer, desc, pool, hr);
This wasn't introduced by this patch, but is it possible for a shared UMEM
metadata TOCTOU race to bypass the checksum bounds validation?
In xsk_skb_metadata(), meta points to the metadata area within the umem buffer
(buffer - pool->tx_metadata_len), which is memory-mapped and concurrently
writable by userspace. The function performs a bounds check:
if (unlikely(meta->request.csum_start +
meta->request.csum_offset +
sizeof(__sum16) > desc->len))
return -EINVAL;
If this passes, it re-reads the values directly from the shared memory:
skb->csum_start = hr + meta->request.csum_start;
skb->csum_offset = meta->request.csum_offset;
Could a malicious user application race to overwrite these values with
arbitrarily large 16-bit integers between the validation check and the
assignment, leading to out-of-bounds DMA accesses? Might we need to copy
the metadata to a local variable (e.g., using READ_ONCE()) before validation?
> - if (unlikely(err))
> + if (unlikely(err)) {
> + kfree_skb(skb);
> return ERR_PTR(err);
> + }
> }
> } else {
> struct xsk_addrs *xsk_addr;
This wasn't introduced by this patch, but does the non-zerocopy
xsk_build_skb() leak the xsk_addrs structure on its error path?
When appending a fragment to an existing SKB (!skb is false) in
xsk_build_skb(), the code converts the destructor_arg from a direct address
to an allocated xsk_addrs structure and initializes xsk_addr->num_descs = 1.
If the subsequent alloc_page() fails, it jumps to free_err and returns
-EAGAIN, leaving the partially built SKB in xs->skb without incrementing
num_descs.
When the socket is closed or the SKB is subsequently dropped via
xsk_drop_skb(), xsk_consume_skb() is called. Because destructor_arg is now a
valid pointer, it fetches num_descs as 1. The cleanup logic relies on:
if (unlikely(num_descs > 1))
to free the xsk_addrs structure. Since num_descs is exactly 1, does it skip
the free, permanently leaking the xsk_tx_generic_cache object?
I saw this issue is addressed later in the patch series (xsk: fix xsk_addrs
slab leak on multi-buffer error path).
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260502200722.53960-1-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com?part=6
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-03 20:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-02 20:07 [PATCH net v5 0/8] xsk: fix bugs around xsk skb allocation Jason Xing
2026-05-02 20:07 ` [PATCH net v5 1/8] xsk: reject sw-csum UMEM binding to IFF_TX_SKB_NO_LINEAR devices Jason Xing
2026-05-03 20:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-05-05 19:18 ` Jason Xing
2026-05-02 20:07 ` [PATCH net v5 2/8] xsk: free the skb when hitting the upper bound MAX_SKB_FRAGS Jason Xing
2026-05-03 20:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-05-05 19:26 ` Jason Xing
2026-05-02 20:07 ` [PATCH net v5 3/8] xsk: handle NULL dereference of the skb without frags issue Jason Xing
2026-05-03 20:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-05-05 19:28 ` Jason Xing
2026-05-02 20:07 ` [PATCH net v5 4/8] xsk: fix use-after-free of xs->skb in xsk_build_skb() free_err path Jason Xing
2026-05-03 20:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-05-05 19:32 ` Jason Xing
2026-05-02 20:07 ` [PATCH net v5 5/8] xsk: prevent CQ desync when freeing half-built skbs in xsk_build_skb() Jason Xing
2026-05-03 20:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-05-05 19:36 ` Jason Xing
2026-05-02 20:07 ` [PATCH net v5 6/8] xsk: avoid skb leak in XDP_TX_METADATA case Jason Xing
2026-05-03 20:09 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-05-05 19:43 ` Jason Xing
2026-05-02 20:07 ` [PATCH net v5 7/8] xsk: fix xsk_addrs slab leak on multi-buffer error path Jason Xing
2026-05-02 20:07 ` [PATCH net v5 8/8] xsk: fix u64 descriptor address truncation on 32-bit architectures Jason Xing
2026-05-03 20:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-05-05 19:46 ` Jason Xing
2026-05-04 14:59 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2026-05-05 15:44 ` [PATCH net v5 0/8] xsk: fix bugs around xsk skb allocation Alexander Lobakin
2026-05-05 19:09 ` Jason Xing
2026-05-06 2:40 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20260503200927.73EA1C2BCB4@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kerneljasonxing@gmail.com \
--cc=sashiko@lists.linux.dev \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox