From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Oliver Hartkopp" <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Cc: "Marc Kleine-Budde" <mkl@pengutronix.de>,
"Oleksij Rempel" <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>,
"Vincent Mailhol" <mailhol@kernel.org>,
"Oliver Hartkopp" <socketcan@hartkopp.net>,
linux-can@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 01/11] can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2026 10:39:49 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260714103950.538C31F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260714-bcm_fixes-v13-1-fd667c61099a@hartkopp.net>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
New issues:
- [High] Module exit sequence destroys the socket slab cache before flushing the deferred workqueue, causing a kernel warning and slab cache leak.
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] Missing RCU-safe list primitives for rx_ops and tx_ops list modifications and traversals, causing potential crashes during procfs reads.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v13 01/11] can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF ---
commit 9beb61cd8491cca022797eead8556214843e4d99
Author: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF
This commit fixes a use-after-free by deferring the deallocation of
bcm_op to a dedicated workqueue instead of using call_rcu(). It ensures
that hrtimer cancellation and memory freeing occur in a sleepable context.
It also takes a reference on the socket while the work is pending to
prevent the socket from being freed prematurely.
> diff --git a/net/can/bcm.c b/net/can/bcm.c
> index a4bef2c48a559..bdf53241bd7b3 100644
> --- a/net/can/bcm.c
> +++ b/net/can/bcm.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -1060,6 +1081,7 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
>
> /* bcm_can_tx / bcm_tx_timeout_handler needs this */
> op->sk = sk;
> + sock_hold(sk);
> op->ifindex = ifindex;
>
> /* initialize uninitialized (kzalloc) structure */
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but can traversing the RCU-protected tx_ops
and rx_ops lists without RCU-safe primitives cause crashes during procfs
reads?
Looking at bcm_tx_setup() and bcm_rx_setup(), list_add() is used instead
of list_add_rcu(), which lacks the smp_store_release() memory barriers:
bcm_tx_setup() {
...
/* add this bcm_op to the list of the tx_ops */
list_add(&op->list, &bo->tx_ops);
...
}
Concurrently, if another thread reads /proc/net/can-bcm, bcm_proc_show()
traverses bo->tx_ops locklessly under rcu_read_lock() using the non-RCU
list_for_each_entry():
bcm_proc_show() {
...
list_for_each_entry(op, &bo->tx_ops, list) {
...
}
Can weakly ordered CPUs reorder the initialization of the bcm_op structure
after its insertion, allowing lockless RCU readers to observe uninitialized
memory and crash?
[ ... ]
> @@ -1869,6 +1898,8 @@ static void __exit bcm_module_exit(void)
> can_proto_unregister(&bcm_can_proto);
> unregister_netdevice_notifier(&canbcm_notifier);
> unregister_pernet_subsys(&canbcm_pernet_ops);
> + rcu_barrier();
> + destroy_workqueue(bcm_wq);
> }
[Severity: High]
Does this module exit sequence destroy the socket slab cache before flushing
the deferred workqueue?
Looking at bcm_free_op_work(), the deferred work item drops the final socket
reference:
bcm_free_op_work() {
...
sock_put(op->sk);
kfree(op);
}
If there are pending work items in bcm_wq during module unload,
can_proto_unregister() will call kmem_cache_destroy() on the protocol's
slab cache while sockets are still allocated.
Will this cause a kernel warning and a slab cache leak, since
destroy_workqueue() runs after can_proto_unregister() and will attempt to
free sockets into the destroyed slab?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260714-bcm_fixes-v13-0-fd667c61099a@hartkopp.net?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-14 10:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-14 10:12 [PATCH v13 00/11] can: bcm: collected fixes - final final Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 01/11] can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:39 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-14 10:42 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 02/11] can: bcm: fix lockless bound/ifindex race and silent RX_SETUP failure Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 10:41 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 03/11] can: bcm: add locking when updating filter and timer values Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:27 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 10:34 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 04/11] can: bcm: fix CAN frame rx/tx statistics Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 10:35 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 05/11] can: bcm: add missing rcu list annotations and operations Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:32 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 10:46 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 06/11] can: bcm: extend bcm_tx_lock usage for data and timer updates Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:34 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 10:56 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 07/11] can: bcm: validate frame length in bcm_rx_setup() for RTR replies Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 08/11] can: bcm: add missing device refcount for CAN filter removal Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 09/11] can: bcm: fix stale rx/tx ops after device removal Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:44 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-14 11:24 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 11:41 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2026-07-14 11:47 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 12:36 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2026-07-14 13:07 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 13:41 ` Marc Kleine-Budde
2026-07-14 14:40 ` Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 10/11] can: bcm: fix data race on rx_stamp/rx_ifindex in bcm_rx_handler() Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
2026-07-14 10:12 ` [PATCH v13 11/11] can: bcm: track a single source interface for ANYDEV timeout/throttle ops Oliver Hartkopp via B4 Relay
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=20260714103950.538C31F000E9@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