netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: dborkman@redhat.com
Cc: linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, vyasevich@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] sctp: sctp_close: fix release of bindings for deferred call_rcu's
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 13:23:02 -0500 (EST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130204.132302.931092608711964255.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1359729463-11833-1-git-send-email-dborkman@redhat.com>

From: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>
Date: Fri,  1 Feb 2013 15:37:43 +0100

> It seems due to RCU usage, i.e. within SCTP's address binding list,
> a, say, ``behavioral change'' was introduced which does actually
> not conform to the RFC anymore. In particular consider the following
> (fictional) scenario to demonstrate this:
> 
>   do:
>     Two SOCK_SEQPACKET-style sockets are opened (S1, S2)
>     S1 is bound to 127.0.0.1, port 1024 [server]
>     S2 is bound to 127.0.0.1, port 1025 [client]
>     listen(2) is invoked on S1
>     From S2 we call one sendmsg(2) with msg.msg_name and
>        msg.msg_namelen parameters set to the server's
>        address
>     S1, S2 are closed
>     goto do
> 
> The first pass of this loop passes successful, while the second round
> fails during binding of S1 (address still in use). What is happening?
> In the first round, the initial handshake is being done, and, at the
> time close(2) is called on S1, a non-graceful shutdown is performed via
> ABORT since in S1's receive queue an unprocessed packet is present,
> thus stating an error condition. This can be considered as a correct
> behavior.
> 
> During close also all bound addresses are freed, thus nothing *must*
> be active anymore. In reference to RFC2960:
> 
>   After checking the Verification Tag, the receiving endpoint shall
>   remove the association from its record, and shall report the
>   termination to its upper layer. (9.1 Abort of an Association)
> 
> Also, no half-open states are supported, thus after an ungraceful
> shutdown, we leave nothing behind. However, this seems not to be
> happening though. In a real-world scenario, this is exactly where
> it breaks the lksctp-tools functional test suite, *for instance*:
> 
>   ./test_sockopt
>   test_sockopt.c  1 PASS : getsockopt(SCTP_STATUS) on a socket with no assoc
>   test_sockopt.c  2 PASS : getsockopt(SCTP_STATUS)
>   test_sockopt.c  3 PASS : getsockopt(SCTP_STATUS) with invalid associd
>   test_sockopt.c  4 PASS : getsockopt(SCTP_STATUS) with NULL associd
>   test_sockopt.c  5 BROK : bind: Address already in use
> 
> The underlying problem is that sctp_endpoint_destroy() hasn't been
> triggered yet while the next bind attempt is being done. It will be
> triggered eventually (but too late) by sctp_transport_destroy_rcu()
> after one RCU grace period:
> 
>   sctp_transport_destroy()
>     sctp_transport_destroy_rcu() ----.
>       sctp_association_put() [*]  <--+--> sctp_packet_free()
>         sctp_association_destroy()          [...]
>           sctp_endpoint_put()                 skb->destructor
>             sctp_endpoint_destroy()             sctp_wfree()
>               sctp_bind_addr_free()               sctp_association_put() [*]
> 
> Thus, we move out the condition with sctp_association_put() as well as
> the sctp_packet_free() invocation and the issue can be solved. We also
> better free the SCTP chunks first before putting the ref of the association.
> 
> With this patch, the example above (which simulates a similar scenario
> as in the implementation of this test case) and therefore also the test
> suite run successfully through. Tested by myself.
> 
> Cc: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>

Applied.

      parent reply	other threads:[~2013-02-04 18:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-02-01 14:37 [PATCH net-next v3] sctp: sctp_close: fix release of bindings for deferred call_rcu's Daniel Borkmann
2013-02-01 14:55 ` Vlad Yasevich
2013-02-04 12:10 ` Neil Horman
2013-02-04 18:23 ` David Miller [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=20130204.132302.931092608711964255.davem@davemloft.net \
    --to=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dborkman@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vyasevich@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).