From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Oliver Hartkopp" <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Cc: "Oliver Hartkopp" <socketcan@hartkopp.net>,
linux-can@vger.kernel.org, "Vincent Mailhol" <mailhol@kernel.org>,
"Oleksij Rempel" <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>,
"Marc Kleine-Budde" <mkl@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 11/11] can: bcm: track a single source interface for ANYDEV timeout/throttle ops
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2026 18:43:51 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260709184351.723F71F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260709-bcm_fixes-v11-11-067ba11bec5c@hartkopp.net>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] Race condition between interface unregistration and in-flight packets permanently breaks ANYDEV sockets.
- [Medium] Data race and torn read on 64-bit ktime_t variables bypassing ANYDEV concurrency protection.
--
--- Patch [11]: [PATCH v11 11/11] can: bcm: track a single source interface for ANYDEV timeout/throttle ops ---
commit ed6fe9660233297822929009c213120acb00229f
Author: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
can: bcm: track a single source interface for ANYDEV timeout/throttle ops
An ANYDEV rx op with an active RX timeout/throttle timer has no defined
semantics when matching frames arrive from multiple interfaces, leading to
data corruption. This patch adds op->if_detected to track the first interface
that delivers a matching frame, rejecting frames from other interfaces.
The claim is released on NETDEV_UNREGISTER or timer reconfiguration.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/20260709105031.1A39C1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org/
> diff --git a/net/can/bcm.c b/net/can/bcm.c
> index 10a883b50fc63..8cc0d2267582f 100644
> --- a/net/can/bcm.c
> +++ b/net/can/bcm.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -776,6 +777,28 @@ static void bcm_rx_handler(struct sk_buff *skb, void *data)
> return;
> }
>
> + /* An ANYDEV op with an active RX timeout and/or throttle timer
> + * tracks a single source interface: claim the first interface that
> + * delivers a matching frame and reject frames from any other one,
> + * before hrtimer_cancel() below can touch op->timer - this avoids
> + * racing bcm_rx_timeout_handler() across concurrent interfaces.
> + * RX_RTR_FRAME ops are excluded, as kt_ival1/kt_ival2 may briefly
> + * hold a stale value from an earlier non-RTR configuration.
> + */
> + if (!op->ifindex && !(op->flags & RX_RTR_FRAME) &&
> + (op->kt_ival1 || op->kt_ival2)) {
[Severity: Medium]
Can the lockless read of these 64-bit ktime_t variables cause a torn read on
32-bit platforms?
If the torn read evaluates to zero while the timers are actually configured,
wouldn't it bypass the interface-tracking logic and allow concurrent frames
to clobber shared metadata?
> + bool foreign;
> +
> + spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
> + if (!op->if_detected)
> + op->if_detected = skb->dev->ifindex;
[Severity: High]
Can an in-flight packet spuriously re-claim the stale ifindex here?
In bcm_notify(), the claim is released when an interface goes down. Since
bcm_notify() executes before synchronize_net(), could an already dequeued
packet arrive here, see op->if_detected == 0, and re-claim the dead
interface's index?
This seems like it would permanently block future packets from other valid
interfaces.
> + foreign = op->if_detected != skb->dev->ifindex;
> + spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
> +
> + if (foreign)
> + return;
> + }
> +
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260709-bcm_fixes-v11-0-067ba11bec5c@hartkopp.net?part=11
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-09 18:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-09 17:56 [PATCH v11 00/11] can: bcm: collected fixes - final6 \o/ Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 01/11] can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 18:10 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 02/11] can: bcm: fix lockless bound/ifindex race and silent RX_SETUP failure Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 18:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 03/11] can: bcm: add locking when updating filter and timer values Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 18:18 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 04/11] can: bcm: fix CAN frame rx/tx statistics Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 18:23 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 05/11] can: bcm: add missing rcu list annotations and operations Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 18:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 06/11] can: bcm: extend bcm_tx_lock usage for data and timer updates Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 07/11] can: bcm: validate frame length in bcm_rx_setup() for RTR replies Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 08/11] can: bcm: add missing device refcount for CAN filter removal Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 09/11] can: bcm: fix stale rx/tx ops after device removal Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 18:39 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 10/11] can: bcm: fix data race on rx_stamp/rx_ifindex in bcm_rx_handler() Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 18:38 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-09 17:56 ` [PATCH v11 11/11] can: bcm: track a single source interface for ANYDEV timeout/throttle ops Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-09 18:43 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
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=20260709184351.723F71F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-can@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mailhol@kernel.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=o.rempel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox