Linux real-time development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Nam Cao" <namcao@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 3/3] af_unix: Clean up unix_schedule_gc()
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 09:31:54 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260723093155.DDB141F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <79c2a0d700639a430bacea5dd9581caebcd54b08.1784712370.git.namcao@linutronix.de>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] An unconditional call to `unix_schedule_gc()` in `do_exit()` causes a severe system-wide GC storm and CPU exhaustion if any live cyclic AF_UNIX sockets exist.
--

--- Patch [3]: [PATCH net-next v3 3/3] af_unix: Clean up unix_schedule_gc() ---
commit fc308672f15e1ad0994af5c62a43b996e97d2e7a
Author: Nam Cao <namcao@linutronix.de>

af_unix: Clean up unix_schedule_gc()

This commit simplifies unix_schedule_gc() by removing its user argument,
since it is currently only called with NULL. The conditionals checking the
user parameter within the function body are also removed.

> diff --git a/kernel/exit.c b/kernel/exit.c
> index 593ac4b0105f2..50c5eff07bd65 100644
> --- a/kernel/exit.c
> +++ b/kernel/exit.c
> @@ -1014,7 +1014,7 @@ void __noreturn do_exit(long code)
>  	 * Must be after exit_files() and exit_task_work(tsk) to ensure that
>  	 * the task's AF_UNIX sockets have all been closed.
>  	 */
> -	unix_schedule_gc(NULL);
> +	unix_schedule_gc();
>  
>  	sched_autogroup_exit_task(tsk);
>  	cgroup_task_exit(tsk);

[ ... ]

> diff --git a/net/unix/garbage.c b/net/unix/garbage.c
> index f180c59b3da9d..d46aeb9d20518 100644
> --- a/net/unix/garbage.c
> +++ b/net/unix/garbage.c
> @@ -635,23 +635,11 @@ static void unix_gc(struct work_struct *work)
>  
>  static DECLARE_WORK(unix_gc_work, unix_gc);
>  
> -#define UNIX_INFLIGHT_SANE_USER		(SCM_MAX_FD * 8)
> -
> -void unix_schedule_gc(struct user_struct *user)
> +void unix_schedule_gc(void)
>  {
>  	if (READ_ONCE(unix_graph_state) == UNIX_GRAPH_NOT_CYCLIC)
>  		return;
>  
> -	/* Penalise users who want to send AF_UNIX sockets
> -	 * but whose sockets have not been received yet.
> -	 */
> -	if (user &&
> -	    READ_ONCE(user->unix_inflight) < UNIX_INFLIGHT_SANE_USER)
> -		return;
> -
>  	if (!READ_ONCE(gc_in_progress))
>  		queue_work(system_dfl_wq, &unix_gc_work);

[Severity: High]
Does this unconditional call to unix_schedule_gc() from do_exit() create a
risk of system-wide GC storms?

If an unprivileged local user creates a cyclic graph of AF_UNIX sockets (for
example, by sending the FDs of a socketpair to each other) and keeps the file
descriptors open, it forms a "live" cycle.

In this scenario:
1. unix_graph_state becomes UNIX_GRAPH_CYCLIC (as set in unix_walk_scc_fast).
2. When unix_gc_work runs, it ignores the live cycle but leaves
   unix_graph_state as UNIX_GRAPH_CYCLIC.
3. Once GC finishes, gc_in_progress becomes false.

Since do_exit() unconditionally calls unix_schedule_gc(), any unrelated task
exiting anywhere in the system will immediately re-queue the GC.

Could this result in CPU exhaustion and a denial of service due to heavy lock
contention on unix_gc_lock, as the GC continuously walks the inflight socket
graph?

> -
> -	if (user && READ_ONCE(unix_graph_cyclic_sccs))
> -		flush_work(&unix_gc_work);
>  }

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/cover.1784712370.git.namcao@linutronix.de?part=3

      reply	other threads:[~2026-07-23  9:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-22  9:31 [PATCH net-next v3 0/3] af_unix: Fix priority inversion issue Nam Cao
2026-07-22  9:31 ` [PATCH net-next v3 1/3] af_unix: Schedule the garbage collector at task exit Nam Cao
2026-07-23  9:31   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-22  9:31 ` [PATCH net-next v3 2/3] af_unix: Do not wait for garbage collector in sendmsg() Nam Cao
2026-07-23  9:31   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-22  9:31 ` [PATCH net-next v3 3/3] af_unix: Clean up unix_schedule_gc() Nam Cao
2026-07-23  9:31   ` 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=20260723093155.DDB141F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=namcao@linutronix.de \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@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