From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
To: くさあさ <pioooooooooip@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-nfc@lists.01.org, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] nfc: llcp: avoid double release/put on LLCP_CLOSED in nfc_llcp_recv_disc()
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:22:51 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <69a6d938-e576-44cf-bcac-e86f30f24cb2@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFgAp7gP_yk7nF_AN+B_DRDJW--ytCKKQToG2m6y4h_SLBBaLA@mail.gmail.com>
On 17/12/2025 14:05, くさあさ wrote:
> Hi Krzysztof,
>
> Sorry about that — my previous response might not have made it to the
> list/thread.
> Replying here to address your concerns before sending v3.
>
> 1) DM_DISC reply after LLCP_CLOSED
> This is not a new behavior introduced by my change. In the old code, the
> LLCP_CLOSED branch did release_sock() and nfc_llcp_sock_put(), but it did not
> return/goto, so execution continued and still reached nfc_llcp_send_dm(...,
> LLCP_DM_DISC) afterwards. The disc patch only removes the redundant
> CLOSED-branch
> cleanup so release_sock()/nfc_llcp_sock_put() are performed exactly once via the
> common exit path, while keeping the existing DM_DISC reply behavior.
I understand that you did not change the flow. I did not claim you did.
I ask why do you think your code is correct.
Do not top post and do not send new versions while the discussion is
still going.
>
> 2) Initial refcount / double free concern
> nfc_llcp_recv_disc()/recv_hdlc() take an extra reference via nfc_llcp_sock_get()
> (sock_hold()). The issue is the mismatched put/unlock: the CLOSED branch drops
> the reference and releases the lock, and then the common exit path does the same
> again. This is a refcount/locking imbalance regardless of whether it immediately
> frees the object, and it may become a UAF depending on timing/refcounting.
You did not really address the problem. The refcnt has imbalance only if
you assume initial refcnt was 0.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-18 10:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-17 12:46 [PATCH v2 0/2] nfc: llcp: fix double put/unlock on LLCP_CLOSED in recv handlers Qianchang Zhao
2025-12-17 12:46 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] nfc: llcp: avoid double release/put on LLCP_CLOSED in nfc_llcp_recv_disc() Qianchang Zhao
2025-12-17 12:57 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2025-12-17 13:05 ` くさあさ
2025-12-18 10:22 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski [this message]
2025-12-18 11:39 ` くさあさ
2025-12-17 12:46 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] nfc: llcp: stop processing on LLCP_CLOSED in nfc_llcp_recv_hdlc() Qianchang Zhao
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-12-17 12:57 [PATCH v2 0/2] nfc: llcp: fix double put/unlock on LLCP_CLOSED in recv handlers Qianchang Zhao
2025-12-17 12:57 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] nfc: llcp: avoid double release/put on LLCP_CLOSED in nfc_llcp_recv_disc() Qianchang Zhao
2025-12-17 13:00 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
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=69a6d938-e576-44cf-bcac-e86f30f24cb2@kernel.org \
--to=krzk@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nfc@lists.01.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=pioooooooooip@gmail.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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).