From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dominique Martinet Subject: [PATCH 1/2] 9p/trans_fd: abort p9_read_work if req status changed Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2018 06:05:55 +0200 Message-ID: <1539057956-23741-1-git-send-email-asmadeus@codewreck.org> References: <20181009020949.GA29622@nautica> Cc: Dominique Martinet , v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, Eric Van Hensbergen , Latchesar Ionkov To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input) Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20181009020949.GA29622@nautica> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org From: Dominique Martinet p9_read_work would try to handle an errored req even if it got put to error state by another thread between the lookup (that worked) and the time it had been fully read. The request itself is safe to use because we hold a ref to it from the lookup (for m->rreq, so it was safe to read into the request data buffer until this point), but the req_list has been deleted at the same time status changed, and client_cb already has been called as well, so we should not do either. Signed-off-by: Dominique Martinet Reported-by: syzbot+2222c34dc40b515f30dc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Cc: Eric Van Hensbergen Cc: Latchesar Ionkov --- As written in reply to the bug report I'm not sure it's what syzbot complained about exactly, but it feels like a correct thing to do. The second patch is unrelated to the syzbot report, but something that occured to me while looking at this ; I'll take both into linux-next around the start of next week after getting some proper testing done unless remarks happen. (they pass basic tests already) net/9p/trans_fd.c | 17 +++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/9p/trans_fd.c b/net/9p/trans_fd.c index 12559c474dde..a0317d459cde 100644 --- a/net/9p/trans_fd.c +++ b/net/9p/trans_fd.c @@ -292,7 +292,6 @@ static void p9_read_work(struct work_struct *work) __poll_t n; int err; struct p9_conn *m; - int status = REQ_STATUS_ERROR; m = container_of(work, struct p9_conn, rq); @@ -375,11 +374,17 @@ static void p9_read_work(struct work_struct *work) p9_debug(P9_DEBUG_TRANS, "got new packet\n"); m->rreq->rc.size = m->rc.offset; spin_lock(&m->client->lock); - if (m->rreq->status != REQ_STATUS_ERROR) - status = REQ_STATUS_RCVD; - list_del(&m->rreq->req_list); - /* update req->status while holding client->lock */ - p9_client_cb(m->client, m->rreq, status); + if (m->rreq->status == REQ_STATUS_SENT) { + list_del(&m->rreq->req_list); + p9_client_cb(m->client, m->rreq, REQ_STATUS_RCVD); + } else { + spin_unlock(&m->client->lock); + p9_debug(P9_DEBUG_ERROR, + "Request tag %d errored out while we were reading the reply\n", + m->rc.tag); + err = -EIO; + goto error; + } spin_unlock(&m->client->lock); m->rc.sdata = NULL; m->rc.offset = 0; -- 2.19.1