From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: sashiko-bot@kernel.org, "Keke Ming" <ming.jvle@gmail.com>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uprobes: Free utask on dup_return_instance() failure
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2026 21:02:08 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260823210208.25e21677ac0c691037d7ef24@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260822060014.AD2681F000E9@smtp.kernel.org>
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 06:00:14 +0000
sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
>
> Pre-existing issues:
> - [Critical] Double free of `extra_consumers` during `fork()` due to missing pointer nullification in `dup_return_instance()` / `ri_pool_push()`.
> --
>
> --- Patch [1]: [PATCH] uprobes: Free utask on dup_return_instance() failure ---
> commit 52bd4caeb5b9686b25fe707609034e9397c6100a
> Author: Keke Ming <ming.jvle@gmail.com>
>
> uprobes: Free utask on dup_return_instance() failure
>
> dup_utask() installs the new uprobe_task in t->utask before copying
> return_instances. If dup_return_instance() fails, the partially copied
> utask is left attached to the child task. This patch frees the partially
> copied utask before returning -ENOMEM.
>
> > diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > index 7709ea8824778..7547929ab294d 100644
> > --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> > @@ -2140,8 +2140,10 @@ static int dup_utask(struct task_struct *t, struct uprobe_task *o_utask)
> > p = &n_utask->return_instances;
> > for (o = o_utask->return_instances; o; o = o->next) {
> > n = dup_return_instance(o);
> > - if (!n)
> > + if (!n) {
> > + uprobe_free_utask(t);
>
> [Severity: Critical]
> This is a pre-existing issue, but can dup_return_instance() leave a dangling
> pointer that results in a double free of extra_consumers when
> uprobe_free_utask() is called here?
Hmm, this seems another bug here.
>
> If a multi-consumer uretprobe is hit, extra_consumers is allocated. When this
> returns, it is pushed to the reuse pool:
>
> kernel/events/uprobes.c:ri_pool_push() {
> ri->cons_cnt = 0;
> ri->next = utask->ri_pool;
> utask->ri_pool = ri;
> }
>
> This resets cons_cnt to 0 but retains the extra_consumers heap pointer.
>
> If the thread then hits a single-consumer uretprobe, alloc_return_instance()
> reuses the pooled object. push_consumer() increments cons_cnt to 1 and uses
> the inline consumer, leaving the old extra_consumers pointer untouched.
>
> When the task calls fork(), dup_return_instance() does a shallow copy:
>
> kernel/events/uprobes.c:dup_return_instance() {
> ri = kmemdup(old, sizeof(*ri), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!ri)
> return NULL;
>
> if (unlikely(old->cons_cnt > 1)) {
> ri->extra_consumers = kmemdup(old->extra_consumers, ...
> ...
> }
>
> Since old->cons_cnt == 1, it skips deep-copying or clearing extra_consumers.
> Both the parent and child tasks now share the exact same heap pointer.
Hmm, so either clearing extra_consumers when returning ri to the pool
(with releasing extra_consumers) or clearing new ri->extra_consumers when
dup_return_instance(), will fix this.
Thanks,
>
> When the tasks exit, or if dup_return_instance() fails and triggers the new
> cleanup path in this patch, ri_free() will execute kfree(ri->extra_consumers)
> in both contexts, freeing the same memory twice.
>
> > return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> >
> > /* if uprobe is non-NULL, we'll have an extra refcount for uprobe */
> > uprobe = hprobe_expire(&o->hprobe, true);
>
> --
> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260822054620.452262-1-ming.jvle@gmail.com?part=1
>
--
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <mhiramat@kernel.org>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-23 12:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-22 5:46 [PATCH] uprobes: Free utask on dup_return_instance() failure Keke Ming
2026-08-22 6:00 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-23 12:02 ` Masami Hiramatsu [this message]
2026-08-23 13:00 ` Keke Ming
2026-08-22 15:09 ` [PATCH v2] " Keke Ming
2026-08-22 15:16 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-23 15:38 ` [PATCH] " Oleg Nesterov
2026-08-23 16:26 ` Keke Ming
2026-08-23 19:41 ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-08-24 11:22 ` Keke Ming
2026-08-24 15:57 ` Oleg Nesterov
2026-08-24 19:54 ` Andrii Nakryiko
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=20260823210208.25e21677ac0c691037d7ef24@kernel.org \
--to=mhiramat@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.jvle@gmail.com \
--cc=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--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