public inbox for netdev@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Qingfang Deng <qingfang.deng@linux.dev>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
	David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@kernel.org>,
	Mitchell Blank Jr <mitch@sfgoth.com>,
	Chas Williams <3chas3@gmail.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
	James Chapman <jchapman@katalix.com>, Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Taegu Ha <hataegu0826@gmail.com>,
	Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com>,
	Eric Woudstra <ericwouds@gmail.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	Dawid Osuchowski <dawid.osuchowski@linux.intel.com>,
	Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>,
	linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-atm-general@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] ppp: unify two channel structs
Date: Tue, 5 May 2026 13:16:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <590d7931-02b0-45d6-8f43-ef909c9bde89@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260430090532.244758-2-qingfang.deng@linux.dev>

On 4/30/26 11:05 AM, Qingfang Deng wrote:
> Historically, PPP maintained two separate structures for a channel:
> 'struct channel' was internal to ppp_generic.c, while 'struct ppp_channel'
> was the public interface that drivers were required to embed. This
> duplication was redundant and forced drivers to manage the lifecycle of
> the public structure.
> 
> Unify these two structures into a single 'struct ppp_channel', which is
> now internal to ppp_generic.c. Drivers now use a 'ppp_channel_conf'
> structure to specify registration parameters and receive an opaque
> pointer to the allocated channel.
> 
> Key changes:
> - ppp_register_channel() and ppp_register_net_channel() now return
>   a 'struct ppp_channel *' instead of taking a pointer to a driver-
>   embedded structure.
> - 'struct ppp_channel_ops' methods now take the driver's 'private'
>   pointer directly as their first argument, simplifying driver logic.
> - ppp_unregister_channel() now takes the opaque pointer.
> - Multilink-specific fields are unified and handled via the new
>   configuration structure.
> 
> This cleanup simplifies the driver interface and makes the channel
> lifecycle management more robust by centralizing allocation in the PPP
> generic layer.
> 
> Assisted-by: Gemini:gemini-3-flash
> Signed-off-by: Qingfang Deng <qingfang.deng@linux.dev>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ppp/ppp_async.c      |  51 +++++-----
>  drivers/net/ppp/ppp_generic.c    | 161 +++++++++++++++----------------
>  drivers/net/ppp/ppp_synctty.c    |  51 +++++-----
>  drivers/net/ppp/pppoe.c          |  34 ++++---
>  drivers/net/ppp/pppox.c          |   4 +-
>  drivers/net/ppp/pptp.c           |  40 ++++----
>  drivers/tty/ipwireless/network.c |  30 +++---
>  include/linux/if_pppox.h         |   2 +-
>  include/linux/ppp_channel.h      |  49 ++++++----
>  net/atm/pppoatm.c                |  61 ++++++------
>  net/l2tp/l2tp_ppp.c              |  34 ++++---
>  11 files changed, 271 insertions(+), 246 deletions(-)

This patch is IMHO a bit too big and should be split. Also this kind of
refactor looks very invasive and potentially regression prone. I think
it should include a signficant self-test coverage increase.

> @@ -391,9 +396,9 @@ ppp_async_init(void)
>   * The following routines provide the PPP channel interface.
>   */
>  static int
> -ppp_async_ioctl(struct ppp_channel *chan, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
> +ppp_async_ioctl(void *private, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
>  {
> -	struct asyncppp *ap = chan->private;
> +	struct asyncppp *ap = private;
>  	void __user *argp = (void __user *)arg;
>  	int __user *p = argp;
>  	int err, val;

Minor nit: reverse christmas tree above

> @@ -2985,16 +2983,13 @@ char *ppp_dev_name(struct ppp_channel *chan)
>   * This must be called in process context.
>   */
>  void
> -ppp_unregister_channel(struct ppp_channel *chan)
> +ppp_unregister_channel(struct ppp_channel *pch)
>  {
> -	struct channel *pch = chan->ppp;
>  	struct ppp_net *pn;
>  
>  	if (!pch)
>  		return;		/* should never happen */
>  
> -	chan->ppp = NULL;
> -

Sashiko says:

Could this specific ordering introduce a race condition that might lead
to a use-after-free?
If userspace has a file descriptor attached to this channel, it can
concurrently invoke the PPPIOCCONNECT ioctl. Because
ppp_disconnect_channel()
clears pch->ppp and removes the channel from its current unit before
pch->file.dead is set to 1, the concurrent ioctl could observe
pch->file.dead == 0.
This would allow ppp_connect_channel() to successfully attach the dying
channel to a new PPP unit. Once ppp_unregister_channel() completes and
frees the channel, the new PPP unit would retain a pointer to the freed
memory in its channels list, which might be accessed during a later
packet transmission via ppp_push().

> @@ -215,7 +210,8 @@ static void pppoatm_push(struct atm_vcc *atmvcc, struct sk_buff *skb)
>  		    !memcmp(skb->data, &pppllc[LLC_LEN],
>  		    sizeof(pppllc) - LLC_LEN)) {
>  			pvcc->encaps = e_vc;
> -			pvcc->chan.mtu += LLC_LEN;
> +			ppp_channel_update_mtu(pvcc->chan,
> +					       atmvcc->qos.txtp.max_sdu - PPP_HDRLEN);

Does the above introduce a functional change? At very least some comment
needed. Also possibly better move the update_mtu wrapper to a pre-req patch.

> @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ static void pppol2tp_recv(struct l2tp_session *session, struct sk_buff *skb, int
>  		struct pppox_sock *po;
>  
>  		po = pppox_sk(sk);
> -		ppp_input(&po->chan, skb);
> +		ppp_input(po->chan, skb);

Sashiko says:

Does decoupling the channel lifetime from the driver structure introduce
a use-after-free when receiving packets?
Previously, the struct ppp_channel was embedded in struct pppox_sock,
meaning its lifecycle was safely tied to the socket's refcount. Now that
po->chan is dynamically allocated and freed during pppox_unbind_sock()
via ppp_unregister_channel(), it seems possible for pppol2tp_recv() to
access freed memory.
Since pppol2tp_recv() runs locklessly in softirq context while holding
only rcu_read_lock() and a socket reference, can it observe the
PPPOX_BOUND state and dereference po->chan just after it was freed on
another CPU?

/P


  reply	other threads:[~2026-05-05 11:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-30  9:05 [PATCH net-next 1/3] ppp: use file.dead to check channel unregistration Qingfang Deng
2026-04-30  9:05 ` [PATCH net-next 2/3] ppp: unify two channel structs Qingfang Deng
2026-05-05 11:16   ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2026-04-30  9:05 ` [PATCH net-next 3/3] docs: update ppp_generic.rst for API changes Qingfang Deng

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=590d7931-02b0-45d6-8f43-ef909c9bde89@redhat.com \
    --to=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=3chas3@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dawid.osuchowski@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=dsterba@suse.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=ericwouds@gmail.com \
    --cc=gnault@redhat.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=hataegu0826@gmail.com \
    --cc=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=jchapman@katalix.com \
    --cc=jikos@kernel.org \
    --cc=jirislaby@kernel.org \
    --cc=kees@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-atm-general@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-serial@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mitch@sfgoth.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=qingfang.deng@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