From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
patches@lists.linux.dev, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>,
Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Subject: [PATCH 6.1 53/82] NFSD: Fix "start of NFS reply" pointer passed to nfsd_cache_update()
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 16:22:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231130162137.654346332@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231130162135.977485944@linuxfoundation.org>
6.1-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
[ Upstream commit 1caf5f61dd8430ae5a0b4538afe4953ce7517cbb ]
The "statp + 1" pointer that is passed to nfsd_cache_update() is
supposed to point to the start of the egress NFS Reply header. In
fact, it does point there for AUTH_SYS and RPCSEC_GSS_KRB5 requests.
But both krb5i and krb5p add fields between the RPC header's
accept_stat field and the start of the NFS Reply header. In those
cases, "statp + 1" points at the extra fields instead of the Reply.
The result is that nfsd_cache_update() caches what looks to the
client like garbage.
A connection break can occur for a number of reasons, but the most
common reason when using krb5i/p is a GSS sequence number window
underrun. When an underrun is detected, the server is obliged to
drop the RPC and the connection to force a retransmit with a fresh
GSS sequence number. The client presents the same XID, it hits in
the server's DRC, and the server returns the garbage cache entry.
The "statp + 1" argument has been used since the oldest changeset
in the kernel history repo, so it has been in nfsd_dispatch()
literally since before history began. The problem arose only when
the server-side GSS implementation was added twenty years ago.
Reviewed-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Jeff Layton <jlayton@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
---
fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfssvc.c
@@ -1027,6 +1027,7 @@ out:
int nfsd_dispatch(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, __be32 *statp)
{
const struct svc_procedure *proc = rqstp->rq_procinfo;
+ __be32 *nfs_reply;
/*
* Give the xdr decoder a chance to change this if it wants
@@ -1053,6 +1054,7 @@ int nfsd_dispatch(struct svc_rqst *rqstp
*/
svcxdr_init_encode(rqstp);
+ nfs_reply = xdr_inline_decode(&rqstp->rq_res_stream, 0);
*statp = proc->pc_func(rqstp);
if (*statp == rpc_drop_reply || test_bit(RQ_DROPME, &rqstp->rq_flags))
goto out_update_drop;
@@ -1060,7 +1062,7 @@ int nfsd_dispatch(struct svc_rqst *rqstp
if (!proc->pc_encode(rqstp, &rqstp->rq_res_stream))
goto out_encode_err;
- nfsd_cache_update(rqstp, rqstp->rq_cachetype, statp + 1);
+ nfsd_cache_update(rqstp, rqstp->rq_cachetype, nfs_reply);
out_cached_reply:
return 1;
next parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-30 16:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20231130162135.977485944@linuxfoundation.org>
2023-11-30 16:22 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2023-11-30 16:22 ` [PATCH 6.1 54/82] NFSD: Fix checksum mismatches in the duplicate reply cache Greg Kroah-Hartman
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=20231130162137.654346332@linuxfoundation.org \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=chuck.lever@oracle.com \
--cc=jlayton@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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