public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wang Hai <wanghai38@huawei.com>
To: <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>, <edumazet@google.com>,
	<ncardwell@google.com>, <kuniyu@amazon.com>,
	<davem@davemloft.net>, <dsahern@kernel.org>, <kuba@kernel.org>,
	<pabeni@redhat.com>, <horms@kernel.org>,
	<zhangchangzhong@huawei.com>, <liujian56@huawei.com>,
	<yuehaibing@huawei.com>
Cc: <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v3 net] tcp: Defer ts_recent changes until req is owned
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 17:00:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250224090047.50748-1-wanghai38@huawei.com> (raw)

Recently a bug was discovered where the server had entered TCP_ESTABLISHED
state, but the upper layers were not notified.

The same 5-tuple packet may be processed by different CPUSs, so two
CPUs may receive different ack packets at the same time when the
state is TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV.

In that case, req->ts_recent in tcp_check_req may be changed concurrently,
which will probably cause the newsk's ts_recent to be incorrectly large.
So that tcp_validate_incoming will fail. At this point, newsk will not be
able to enter the TCP_ESTABLISHED.

cpu1                                    cpu2
tcp_check_req
                                        tcp_check_req
 req->ts_recent = rcv_tsval = t1
                                         req->ts_recent = rcv_tsval = t2

 syn_recv_sock
  tcp_sk(child)->rx_opt.ts_recent = req->ts_recent = t2 // t1 < t2
tcp_child_process
 tcp_rcv_state_process
  tcp_validate_incoming
   tcp_paws_check
    if ((s32)(rx_opt->ts_recent - rx_opt->rcv_tsval) <= paws_win)
        // t2 - t1 > paws_win, failed
                                        tcp_v4_do_rcv
                                         tcp_rcv_state_process
                                         // TCP_ESTABLISHED

The cpu2's skb or a newly received skb will call tcp_v4_do_rcv to get
the newsk into the TCP_ESTABLISHED state, but at this point it is no
longer possible to notify the upper layer application. A notification
mechanism could be added here, but the fix is more complex, so the
current fix is used.

In tcp_check_req, req->ts_recent is used to assign a value to
tcp_sk(child)->rx_opt.ts_recent, so removing the change in req->ts_recent
and changing tcp_sk(child)->rx_opt.ts_recent directly after owning the
req fixes this bug.

Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
Signed-off-by: Wang Hai <wanghai38@huawei.com>
Reviewed-by: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com>
---
v2->v3: changed code format and commit msg.
 net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c | 10 ++++------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c
index b089b08e9617..dfdb7a4608a8 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c
@@ -815,12 +815,6 @@ struct sock *tcp_check_req(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
 
 	/* In sequence, PAWS is OK. */
 
-	/* TODO: We probably should defer ts_recent change once
-	 * we take ownership of @req.
-	 */
-	if (tmp_opt.saw_tstamp && !after(TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq, tcp_rsk(req)->rcv_nxt))
-		WRITE_ONCE(req->ts_recent, tmp_opt.rcv_tsval);
-
 	if (TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq == tcp_rsk(req)->rcv_isn) {
 		/* Truncate SYN, it is out of window starting
 		   at tcp_rsk(req)->rcv_isn + 1. */
@@ -869,6 +863,10 @@ struct sock *tcp_check_req(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
 	if (!child)
 		goto listen_overflow;
 
+	if (own_req && tmp_opt.saw_tstamp &&
+	    !after(TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq, tcp_rsk(req)->rcv_nxt))
+		tcp_sk(child)->rx_opt.ts_recent = tmp_opt.rcv_tsval;
+
 	if (own_req && rsk_drop_req(req)) {
 		reqsk_queue_removed(&inet_csk(req->rsk_listener)->icsk_accept_queue, req);
 		inet_csk_reqsk_queue_drop_and_put(req->rsk_listener, req);
-- 
2.17.1


             reply	other threads:[~2025-02-24  9:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-24  9:00 Wang Hai [this message]
2025-02-24  9:22 ` [PATCH v3 net] tcp: Defer ts_recent changes until req is owned Eric Dumazet
2025-02-25 21:16 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2025-02-26  9:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=20250224090047.50748-1-wanghai38@huawei.com \
    --to=wanghai38@huawei.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=kerneljasonxing@gmail.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuniyu@amazon.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=liujian56@huawei.com \
    --cc=ncardwell@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=yuehaibing@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhangchangzhong@huawei.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