From: "Jérémy Jean" <jeremy.jean@oss.cyber.gouv.fr>
To: netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org
Cc: tung.quang.nguyen@est.tech, jmaloy@redhat.com,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
kuba@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tipc: fix use-after-free in netns teardown
Date: Sun, 04 Oct 2026 22:45:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <be98434488231b3464631e6df78a5b5a@oss.cyber.gouv.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <179114204389.434549.3724053905057286143@kernel.org>
On 2026-10-04 21:27, netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org wrote:
> [Severity: Medium]
>
> Can restarting from id 0 on every pass livelock the teardown?
>
> rcv_wq is an ordered workqueue:
>
> tipc_topsrv_work_start()
> s->rcv_wq = alloc_ordered_workqueue("tipc_rcv", 0);
>
> Take a lower-id connection A whose rwork is queued behind the running
> rwork of a higher-id connection B. The loop closes A, but the reference
> held by A's queued rwork keeps A in conn_idr. On every later pass
> idr_get_next() returns A again, so the loop never reaches B.
>
> tipc_conn_recv_work() keeps running while B is connected and requests
> keep arriving:
>
> while (connected(con)) {
> if (tipc_conn_rcv_from_sock(con))
> break;
> ...
>
> The cond_resched() here gives up the CPU. A's work still cannot run on
> the ordered queue until B's worker returns. If B's receive queue never
> empties, idr_in_use never reaches 0 and cleanup_net() spins.
>
> The old loop advanced with id++. It would have cleared CF_CONNECTED on
> B,
> which ends B's worker.
>
> Local peers probably cannot keep this going. The listener is bound with
> TIPC_NODE_SCOPE, and local user sockets hold a reference on the netns.
>
> Remote peers are another matter. tipc_net_ops is registered before
> tipc_topsrv_net_ops, so the bearers are still up when
> tipc_topsrv_stop()
> runs. The TIPC_LISTEN branch of tipc_sk_filter_connect() has no scope
> check. A remote node that knows the listener's port id might be able to
> connect and keep sending TIPC_SUB_CANCEL requests. That precondition
> has
> not been confirmed.
>
> Would it work to first walk forward through all entries, using
> idr_get_next() from id + 1 and closing each one? The loop could then
> retry from 0 only for the entries still waiting on asynchronous
> release.
This looks like a valid concern. I will address it in a v2.
>
>> + if (con && !kref_get_unless_zero(&con->kref))
>> + con = NULL;
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&srv->idr_lock);
>> if (con) {
>> - conn_get(con);
>> - spin_unlock_bh(&srv->idr_lock);
>> tipc_conn_close(con);
>
> [Severity: High]
>
> This is a pre-existing issue, but can this call to tipc_conn_close()
> dereference a NULL con->sock?
Indeed, Sashiko is right. I reproduced it.
I will fix it in a seperate commit in the v2, by guarding
tipc_conn_close()
behind a check on con->sock:
diff --git a/net/tipc/topsrv.c b/net/tipc/topsrv.c
index af530c9..01dd34b 100644
--- a/net/tipc/topsrv.c
+++ b/net/tipc/topsrv.c
@@ -706,7 +706,8 @@ static void tipc_topsrv_stop(struct net *net)
if (con) {
conn_get(con);
spin_unlock_bh(&srv->idr_lock);
- tipc_conn_close(con);
+ if (con->sock)
+ tipc_conn_close(con);
conn_put(con);
spin_lock_bh(&srv->idr_lock);
}
> tipc_topsrv_kern_subscr() creates conn_idr entries that have no socket:
>
> con = tipc_conn_alloc(tipc_topsrv(net), NULL);
>
> tipc_conn_close() dereferences the socket before it tests CF_CONNECTED:
>
> static void tipc_conn_close(struct tipc_conn *con)
> {
> struct sock *sk = con->sock->sk;
>
> Other code in this file already allows for a NULL sock.
> tipc_conn_kref_release() checks if (con->sock).
> tipc_conn_send_to_sock()
> only calls tipc_conn_close() inside its if (con->sock) branch.
>
> Here is a possible sequence:
>
> 1. tipc_topsrv_queue_evt() takes a reference on a kernel subscription
> connection K through tipc_conn_lookup(). It then queues K->swork on
> send_wq.
>
> 2. Before that work runs, the group socket is closed:
> tipc_release()->tipc_group_delete()->tipc_topsrv_kern_unsubscr().
> This clears CF_CONNECTED and drops two references. K stays in
> conn_idr, held only by the swork reference.
>
> 3. cleanup_net()->tipc_topsrv_exit_net()->tipc_topsrv_stop() runs.
> cancel_work_sync(&srv->awork) does not drain send_wq. idr_get_next()
> returns K, kref_get_unless_zero() succeeds, and tipc_conn_close(K)
> dereferences NULL.
>
> The old idr_find() plus conn_get() loop had the same exposure. The new
> loop retries until idr_in_use reaches 0, so any socketless entry still
> in
> conn_idr is now guaranteed to reach tipc_conn_close() at least once.
>
> This loop is being rewritten anyway. Could it skip tipc_conn_close()
> when
> con->sock is NULL? Alternatively, tipc_conn_close() could check
> con->sock before using it.
>
>> conn_put(con);
>> - spin_lock_bh(&srv->idr_lock);
>> }
>> + cond_resched();
>> + spin_lock_bh(&srv->idr_lock);
>> }
>
> [ ... ]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-04 20:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-03 19:25 [PATCH] tipc: fix use-after-free in netns teardown Jérémy Jean
2026-10-03 19:29 ` netdev-bot+sinfo
2026-10-04 19:27 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-10-04 20:45 ` Jérémy Jean [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=be98434488231b3464631e6df78a5b5a@oss.cyber.gouv.fr \
--to=jeremy.jean@oss.cyber.gouv.fr \
--cc=jmaloy@redhat.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=tung.quang.nguyen@est.tech \
/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