Netdev List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>,
	shaozhengchao <shaozhengchao@huawei.com>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Tom Herbert <tom@herbertland.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch net] kcm: fix a race condition in kcm_recvmsg()
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2022 13:52:00 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2GG8EBUExowl8nQ@pop-os.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221023023044.149357-1-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>

On Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 07:30:44PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>
> 
> sk->sk_receive_queue is protected by skb queue lock, but for KCM
> sockets its RX path takes mux->rx_lock to protect more than just
> skb queue, so grabbing skb queue lock is not necessary when
> mux->rx_lock is already held. But kcm_recvmsg() still only grabs
> the skb queue lock, so race conditions still exist.
> 
> Close this race condition by taking mux->rx_lock in kcm_recvmsg()
> too. This way is much simpler than enforcing skb queue lock
> everywhere.
> 

After a second thought, this actually could introduce a performance
regression as struct kcm_mux can be shared by multiple KCM sockets.

So, I am afraid we have to use the skb queue lock, fortunately I found
an easier way (comparing to Paolo's) to solve the skb peek race.

Zhengchao, could you please test the following patch?

Thanks!

---------------->

diff --git a/net/kcm/kcmsock.c b/net/kcm/kcmsock.c
index a5004228111d..890a2423f559 100644
--- a/net/kcm/kcmsock.c
+++ b/net/kcm/kcmsock.c
@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ static void requeue_rx_msgs(struct kcm_mux *mux, struct sk_buff_head *head)
 	struct sk_buff *skb;
 	struct kcm_sock *kcm;
 
-	while ((skb = __skb_dequeue(head))) {
+	while ((skb = skb_dequeue(head))) {
 		/* Reset destructor to avoid calling kcm_rcv_ready */
 		skb->destructor = sock_rfree;
 		skb_orphan(skb);
@@ -1085,53 +1085,17 @@ static int kcm_sendmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
 	return err;
 }
 
-static struct sk_buff *kcm_wait_data(struct sock *sk, int flags,
-				     long timeo, int *err)
-{
-	struct sk_buff *skb;
-
-	while (!(skb = skb_peek(&sk->sk_receive_queue))) {
-		if (sk->sk_err) {
-			*err = sock_error(sk);
-			return NULL;
-		}
-
-		if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_DONE))
-			return NULL;
-
-		if ((flags & MSG_DONTWAIT) || !timeo) {
-			*err = -EAGAIN;
-			return NULL;
-		}
-
-		sk_wait_data(sk, &timeo, NULL);
-
-		/* Handle signals */
-		if (signal_pending(current)) {
-			*err = sock_intr_errno(timeo);
-			return NULL;
-		}
-	}
-
-	return skb;
-}
-
 static int kcm_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg,
 		       size_t len, int flags)
 {
 	struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
 	struct kcm_sock *kcm = kcm_sk(sk);
 	int err = 0;
-	long timeo;
 	struct strp_msg *stm;
 	int copied = 0;
 	struct sk_buff *skb;
 
-	timeo = sock_rcvtimeo(sk, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT);
-
-	lock_sock(sk);
-
-	skb = kcm_wait_data(sk, flags, timeo, &err);
+	skb = skb_recv_datagram(sk, flags, &err);
 	if (!skb)
 		goto out;
 
@@ -1162,14 +1126,11 @@ static int kcm_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg,
 			/* Finished with message */
 			msg->msg_flags |= MSG_EOR;
 			KCM_STATS_INCR(kcm->stats.rx_msgs);
-			skb_unlink(skb, &sk->sk_receive_queue);
-			kfree_skb(skb);
 		}
 	}
 
 out:
-	release_sock(sk);
-
+	skb_free_datagram(sk, skb);
 	return copied ? : err;
 }
 
@@ -1179,7 +1140,6 @@ static ssize_t kcm_splice_read(struct socket *sock, loff_t *ppos,
 {
 	struct sock *sk = sock->sk;
 	struct kcm_sock *kcm = kcm_sk(sk);
-	long timeo;
 	struct strp_msg *stm;
 	int err = 0;
 	ssize_t copied;
@@ -1187,11 +1147,7 @@ static ssize_t kcm_splice_read(struct socket *sock, loff_t *ppos,
 
 	/* Only support splice for SOCKSEQPACKET */
 
-	timeo = sock_rcvtimeo(sk, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT);
-
-	lock_sock(sk);
-
-	skb = kcm_wait_data(sk, flags, timeo, &err);
+	skb = skb_recv_datagram(sk, flags, &err);
 	if (!skb)
 		goto err_out;
 
@@ -1219,13 +1175,11 @@ static ssize_t kcm_splice_read(struct socket *sock, loff_t *ppos,
 	 * finish reading the message.
 	 */
 
-	release_sock(sk);
-
+	skb_free_datagram(sk, skb);
 	return copied;
 
 err_out:
-	release_sock(sk);
-
+	skb_free_datagram(sk, skb);
 	return err;
 }
 

      parent reply	other threads:[~2022-11-01 20:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-23  2:30 [Patch net] kcm: fix a race condition in kcm_recvmsg() Cong Wang
2022-10-25 23:02 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-25 23:49   ` Eric Dumazet
2022-10-28 19:24     ` Cong Wang
2022-10-28 19:21   ` Cong Wang
2022-10-28 23:27     ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-11-01 20:52 ` Cong Wang [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=Y2GG8EBUExowl8nQ@pop-os.localdomain \
    --to=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
    --cc=cong.wang@bytedance.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=shaozhengchao@huawei.com \
    --cc=tom@herbertland.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