From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Cc: Petr Pavlu <petr.pavlu@suse.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Daniel Gomez <da.gomez@kernel.org>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@atomlin.com>,
linux-modules@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] ppp: defer channel free to an RCU grace period to fix pppol2tp RX UAF
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2026 18:01:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260714160104.jK83e41c@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <70060a4e-4630-487f-8ecc-4408e23268d4@paulmck-laptop>
On 2026-07-08 12:22:58 [-0700], Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> The RCU-callback ordering guarantees are quite weak:
…
So this is not working.
> What you maybe *could* do is to have the two RCU callbacks communicate,
> so that the last one to be invoked did the work of both of them. For
> example, use a shared variable initialized to 2, then have each callback
> do atomic_dec_and_test(), with the "winner" doing the work.
>
> Would that do the trick?
This would work but we would have to fix each one or make it slower for
everyone in the common case. So I think adding a rcu_barrier() to module
unload wouldn't be that bad and Petr did not say "get out" so ;)
I've been looking a bit more:
- fs/netfs/objects.c
call_rcu(&rreq->rcu, netfs_free_request_rcu). No rcu_barrier or
flush_worker.
- net/sched/sch_taprio.c
call_rcu(&oper->rcu, taprio_free_sched_cb) from with the destroy
callback. There is a rcu_barrier() but for classification not qdisc.
- drivers/net/tun.c.
tun_free_netdev() from the net_device::priv_destructor.
The net things _might_ be okay since there is netdev_run_todo() with a
rcu_barrier() which is run at rtnl_unlock(). So it might work.
- drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_core.c
call_rcu() but I don't see anything rcu_barrier() like.
- security/keys/trusted-keys/trusted_core.c
security/keys/encrypted-keys/encrypted.c
call_rcu() from an update callback. No rcu_barrier in security/.
This looks "easy".
- drivers/gpu/drm/lima/lima_sched.c
lima_fence_release() does call_rcu() from an release callback. Don't
see anything that would enforce a rcu barrier here. The remove path
has also a lima_sched_slab_fini() which removes the slab cache used in
the rcu callback.
And we had the infinibad thing which got fixed in the meantime.
So I *think* this qualifies for an rcu_barrier() in the module unload
path. No objections I guess?
> Thanx, Paul
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-14 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <D9C0245B-608B-4884-8A09-F55BA4A9F948@doyensec.com>
[not found] ` <de2616b3-6edf-4255-ba77-0674e225ab27@linux.dev>
[not found] ` <akfjpBVML_1RFF91@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <87111f02-5b7a-4185-8364-2faba650578b@linux.dev>
2026-07-06 9:29 ` [PATCH net v2] ppp: defer channel free to an RCU grace period to fix pppol2tp RX UAF Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-07 15:32 ` Petr Pavlu
2026-07-07 16:39 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-08 9:11 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-08 14:01 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-08 7:49 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-08 13:04 ` Petr Pavlu
2026-07-08 13:56 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-08 19:00 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2026-07-08 19:22 ` Paul E. McKenney
2026-07-14 16:01 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2026-07-14 17:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20260714160104.jK83e41c@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=atomlin@atomlin.com \
--cc=da.gomez@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-modules@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=petr.pavlu@suse.com \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox