From: <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: socketcan@hartkopp.net,mkl@pengutronix.de
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: FAILED: patch "[PATCH] can: bcm: add locking when updating filter and timer values" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2026 17:13:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2026072013-groggily-broker-cca7@gregkh> (raw)
The patch below does not apply to the 5.15-stable tree.
If someone wants it applied there, or to any other stable or longterm
tree, then please email the backport, including the original git commit
id to <stable@vger.kernel.org>.
To reproduce the conflict and resubmit, you may use the following commands:
git fetch https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/ linux-5.15.y
git checkout FETCH_HEAD
git cherry-pick -x 749179c2e25b95d22499ed29096b3e02d6dfd2b4
# <resolve conflicts, build, test, etc.>
git commit -s
git send-email --to '<stable@vger.kernel.org>' --in-reply-to '2026072013-groggily-broker-cca7@gregkh' --subject-prefix 'PATCH 5.15.y' 'HEAD^..'
Possible dependencies:
thanks,
greg k-h
------------------ original commit in Linus's tree ------------------
From 749179c2e25b95d22499ed29096b3e02d6dfd2b4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2026 18:55:25 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] can: bcm: add locking when updating filter and timer values
KCSAN detected a simultaneous access to timer values that can be
overwritten in bcm_rx_setup() when updating timer and filter content
while bcm_rx_handler(), bcm_rx_timeout_handler() or bcm_rx_thr_handler()
run concurrently on incoming CAN traffic.
Protect the timer (ival1/ival2/kt_ival1/kt_ival2/kt_lastmsg) and filter
(nframes/flags/frames/last_frames) updates in bcm_rx_setup() with a new
per-op bcm_rx_update_lock, taken with the matching scope in the RX
handlers. memcpy_from_msg() is staged into a temporary buffer before the
lock is taken, since it can sleep and must not run under a spinlock.
hrtimer_cancel() is always called without bcm_rx_update_lock held, since
bcm_rx_timeout_handler()/bcm_rx_thr_handler() take the same lock and a
running callback would otherwise deadlock against the canceller.
Also close a related race: bcm_rx_setup() cleared the RTR flag in the
stored reply frame's can_id as a separate, unprotected step after the
frame content was already installed, so a concurrent bcm_rx_handler()
could transmit a stale reply with CAN_RTR_FLAG still set. Fold that
normalization into the initial frame preparation instead (on the staged
buffer for updates, directly on op->frames pre-registration for new
ops), so the installed frame is always atomically self-consistent.
bcm_rx_handler()'s RX_RTR_FRAME check now takes a lock-protected
snapshot of op->flags before deciding whether to call bcm_can_tx(),
but does not hold the lock across that call.
Also take a lock-protected snapshot of the currframe in bcm_can_tx()
to avoid partly overwrites by content updates in bcm_tx_setup().
Finally check if a TX_RESET_MULTI_IDX/SETTIMER might have reset
op->currframe between the two locked sections in bcm_can_tx().
Omit calling hrtimer_forward() with zero interval in bcm_rx_thr_handler().
kt_ival2 may have been concurrently cleared by bcm_rx_setup() before it
cancels this timer, so check kt_ival2 inside the bcm_rx_update_lock.
Fixes: c2aba69d0c36 ("can: bcm: add locking for bcm_op runtime updates")
Reported-by: syzbot+75e5e4ae00c3b4bb544e@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-can/6975d5cf.a00a0220.33ccc7.0022.GAE@google.com/
Signed-off-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20260714-bcm_fixes-v15-3-562f7e3e42da@hartkopp.net
Cc: stable@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>
diff --git a/net/can/bcm.c b/net/can/bcm.c
index b612135b017d..1e5f8d65d351 100644
--- a/net/can/bcm.c
+++ b/net/can/bcm.c
@@ -129,6 +129,7 @@ struct bcm_op {
struct sock *sk;
struct net_device *rx_reg_dev;
spinlock_t bcm_tx_lock; /* protect currframe/count in runtime updates */
+ spinlock_t bcm_rx_update_lock; /* protect filter/timer data updates */
};
struct bcm_sock {
@@ -293,22 +294,28 @@ static int bcm_proc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
* bcm_can_tx - send the (next) CAN frame to the appropriate CAN interface
* of the given bcm tx op
*/
-static void bcm_can_tx(struct bcm_op *op)
+static void bcm_can_tx(struct bcm_op *op, struct canfd_frame *cf)
{
struct sk_buff *skb;
struct can_skb_ext *csx;
struct net_device *dev;
- struct canfd_frame *cf;
+ struct canfd_frame cframe;
+ bool cyclic = !cf;
+ unsigned int idx = 0;
int err;
/* no target device? => exit */
if (!op->ifindex)
return;
- /* read currframe under lock protection */
- spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_tx_lock);
- cf = op->frames + op->cfsiz * op->currframe;
- spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_tx_lock);
+ if (cyclic) {
+ /* read currframe under lock protection */
+ spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_tx_lock);
+ idx = op->currframe;
+ memcpy(&cframe, op->frames + op->cfsiz * idx, op->cfsiz);
+ cf = &cframe;
+ spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_tx_lock);
+ }
dev = dev_get_by_index(sock_net(op->sk), op->ifindex);
if (!dev) {
@@ -341,14 +348,20 @@ static void bcm_can_tx(struct bcm_op *op)
if (!err)
op->frames_abs++;
- op->currframe++;
+ /* only advance the cyclic sequence if nothing reset currframe while
+ * we were sending - a concurrent TX_RESET_MULTI_IDX means this
+ * frame's bookkeeping belongs to a sequence that no longer exists
+ */
+ if (!cyclic || op->currframe == idx) {
+ op->currframe++;
- /* reached last frame? */
- if (op->currframe >= op->nframes)
- op->currframe = 0;
+ /* reached last frame? */
+ if (op->currframe >= op->nframes)
+ op->currframe = 0;
- if (op->count > 0)
- op->count--;
+ if (op->count > 0)
+ op->count--;
+ }
spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_tx_lock);
out:
@@ -461,7 +474,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart bcm_tx_timeout_handler(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
struct bcm_msg_head msg_head;
if (op->kt_ival1 && (op->count > 0)) {
- bcm_can_tx(op);
+ bcm_can_tx(op, NULL);
if (!op->count && (op->flags & TX_COUNTEVT)) {
/* create notification to user */
@@ -478,7 +491,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart bcm_tx_timeout_handler(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
}
} else if (op->kt_ival2) {
- bcm_can_tx(op);
+ bcm_can_tx(op, NULL);
}
return bcm_tx_set_expiry(op, &op->timer) ?
@@ -622,6 +635,8 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart bcm_rx_timeout_handler(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
struct bcm_op *op = container_of(hrtimer, struct bcm_op, timer);
struct bcm_msg_head msg_head;
+ spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+
/* if user wants to be informed, when cyclic CAN-Messages come back */
if ((op->flags & RX_ANNOUNCE_RESUME) && op->last_frames) {
/* clear received CAN frames to indicate 'nothing received' */
@@ -638,6 +653,8 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart bcm_rx_timeout_handler(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
msg_head.can_id = op->can_id;
msg_head.nframes = 0;
+ spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+
bcm_send_to_user(op, &msg_head, NULL, 0);
return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
@@ -686,15 +703,26 @@ static int bcm_rx_thr_flush(struct bcm_op *op)
static enum hrtimer_restart bcm_rx_thr_handler(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
{
struct bcm_op *op = container_of(hrtimer, struct bcm_op, thrtimer);
+ enum hrtimer_restart ret;
- if (bcm_rx_thr_flush(op)) {
+ spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+
+ /* kt_ival2 may have been concurrently cleared by bcm_rx_setup()
+ * before it cancels this timer - never forward with a zero
+ * interval in that case.
+ */
+ if (bcm_rx_thr_flush(op) && op->kt_ival2) {
hrtimer_forward_now(hrtimer, op->kt_ival2);
- return HRTIMER_RESTART;
+ ret = HRTIMER_RESTART;
} else {
/* rearm throttle handling */
op->kt_lastmsg = 0;
- return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
+ ret = HRTIMER_NORESTART;
}
+
+ spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+
+ return ret;
}
/*
@@ -704,8 +732,10 @@ static void bcm_rx_handler(struct sk_buff *skb, void *data)
{
struct bcm_op *op = (struct bcm_op *)data;
const struct canfd_frame *rxframe = (struct canfd_frame *)skb->data;
+ struct canfd_frame rtrframe;
unsigned int i;
unsigned char traffic_flags;
+ bool rtr_frame;
if (op->can_id != rxframe->can_id)
return;
@@ -729,9 +759,18 @@ static void bcm_rx_handler(struct sk_buff *skb, void *data)
/* update statistics */
op->frames_abs++;
- if (op->flags & RX_RTR_FRAME) {
+ /* snapshot the flag under lock: op->flags/op->frames may be updated
+ * concurrently by bcm_rx_setup().
+ */
+ spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+ rtr_frame = op->flags & RX_RTR_FRAME;
+ if (rtr_frame)
+ memcpy(&rtrframe, op->frames, op->cfsiz);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+
+ if (rtr_frame) {
/* send reply for RTR-request (placed in op->frames[0]) */
- bcm_can_tx(op);
+ bcm_can_tx(op, &rtrframe);
return;
}
@@ -743,6 +782,8 @@ static void bcm_rx_handler(struct sk_buff *skb, void *data)
traffic_flags |= RX_OWN;
}
+ spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+
if (op->flags & RX_FILTER_ID) {
/* the easiest case */
bcm_rx_update_and_send(op, op->last_frames, rxframe,
@@ -778,6 +819,8 @@ static void bcm_rx_handler(struct sk_buff *skb, void *data)
rx_starttimer:
bcm_rx_starttimer(op);
+
+ spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
}
/*
@@ -1116,7 +1159,7 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
}
if (op->flags & TX_ANNOUNCE)
- bcm_can_tx(op);
+ bcm_can_tx(op, NULL);
if (op->flags & STARTTIMER)
bcm_tx_start_timer(op);
@@ -1130,6 +1173,24 @@ static int bcm_tx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
return err;
}
+static void bcm_rx_setup_rtr_check(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head,
+ struct bcm_op *op, void *new_frames)
+{
+ /* funny feature in RX(!)_SETUP only for RTR-mode:
+ * copy can_id into frame BUT without RTR-flag to
+ * prevent a full-load-loopback-test ... ;-]
+ * normalize this on the staged buffer, before it is
+ * ever installed into op->frames.
+ */
+ if (msg_head->flags & RX_RTR_FRAME) {
+ struct canfd_frame *frame0 = new_frames;
+
+ if ((msg_head->flags & TX_CP_CAN_ID) ||
+ frame0->can_id == op->can_id)
+ frame0->can_id = op->can_id & ~CAN_RTR_FLAG;
+ }
+}
+
/*
* bcm_rx_setup - create or update a bcm rx op (for bcm_sendmsg)
*/
@@ -1164,6 +1225,8 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
/* check the given can_id */
op = bcm_find_op(&bo->rx_ops, msg_head, ifindex);
if (op) {
+ void *new_frames = NULL;
+
/* update existing BCM operation */
/*
@@ -1175,19 +1238,48 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
return -E2BIG;
if (msg_head->nframes) {
- /* update CAN frames content */
- err = memcpy_from_msg(op->frames, msg,
- msg_head->nframes * op->cfsiz);
- if (err < 0)
- return err;
+ /* get new CAN frames content before locking */
+ new_frames = kmalloc(msg_head->nframes * op->cfsiz,
+ GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!new_frames)
+ return -ENOMEM;
- /* clear last_frames to indicate 'nothing received' */
- memset(op->last_frames, 0, msg_head->nframes * op->cfsiz);
+ err = memcpy_from_msg(new_frames, msg,
+ msg_head->nframes * op->cfsiz);
+ if (err < 0) {
+ kfree(new_frames);
+ return err;
+ }
+
+ bcm_rx_setup_rtr_check(msg_head, op, new_frames);
}
+ spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
op->nframes = msg_head->nframes;
op->flags = msg_head->flags;
+ if (msg_head->nframes) {
+ /* update CAN frames content */
+ memcpy(op->frames, new_frames,
+ msg_head->nframes * op->cfsiz);
+
+ /* clear last_frames to indicate 'nothing received' */
+ memset(op->last_frames, 0,
+ msg_head->nframes * op->cfsiz);
+ }
+
+ if (msg_head->flags & SETTIMER) {
+ op->ival1 = msg_head->ival1;
+ op->ival2 = msg_head->ival2;
+ op->kt_ival1 = bcm_timeval_to_ktime(msg_head->ival1);
+ op->kt_ival2 = bcm_timeval_to_ktime(msg_head->ival2);
+ op->kt_lastmsg = 0;
+ }
+ spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+
+ /* free temporary frames / kfree(NULL) is safe */
+ kfree(new_frames);
+
/* Only an update -> do not call can_rx_register() */
do_rx_register = 0;
@@ -1198,6 +1290,7 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
return -ENOMEM;
spin_lock_init(&op->bcm_tx_lock);
+ spin_lock_init(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
op->can_id = msg_head->can_id;
op->nframes = msg_head->nframes;
op->cfsiz = CFSIZ(msg_head->flags);
@@ -1239,6 +1332,8 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
kfree(op);
return err;
}
+
+ bcm_rx_setup_rtr_check(msg_head, op, op->frames);
}
/* bcm_can_tx / bcm_tx_timeout_handler needs this */
@@ -1266,29 +1361,22 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
/* check flags */
if (op->flags & RX_RTR_FRAME) {
- struct canfd_frame *frame0 = op->frames;
-
/* no timers in RTR-mode */
hrtimer_cancel(&op->thrtimer);
hrtimer_cancel(&op->timer);
-
- /*
- * funny feature in RX(!)_SETUP only for RTR-mode:
- * copy can_id into frame BUT without RTR-flag to
- * prevent a full-load-loopback-test ... ;-]
- */
- if ((op->flags & TX_CP_CAN_ID) ||
- (frame0->can_id == op->can_id))
- frame0->can_id = op->can_id & ~CAN_RTR_FLAG;
-
} else {
if (op->flags & SETTIMER) {
- /* set timer value */
- op->ival1 = msg_head->ival1;
- op->ival2 = msg_head->ival2;
- op->kt_ival1 = bcm_timeval_to_ktime(msg_head->ival1);
- op->kt_ival2 = bcm_timeval_to_ktime(msg_head->ival2);
+ /* set timers (locked) for newly created op */
+ if (do_rx_register) {
+ spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+ op->ival1 = msg_head->ival1;
+ op->ival2 = msg_head->ival2;
+ op->kt_ival1 = bcm_timeval_to_ktime(msg_head->ival1);
+ op->kt_ival2 = bcm_timeval_to_ktime(msg_head->ival2);
+ op->kt_lastmsg = 0;
+ spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
+ }
/* disable an active timer due to zero value? */
if (!op->kt_ival1)
@@ -1298,9 +1386,11 @@ static int bcm_rx_setup(struct bcm_msg_head *msg_head, struct msghdr *msg,
* In any case cancel the throttle timer, flush
* potentially blocked msgs and reset throttle handling
*/
- op->kt_lastmsg = 0;
hrtimer_cancel(&op->thrtimer);
+
+ spin_lock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
bcm_rx_thr_flush(op);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&op->bcm_rx_update_lock);
}
if ((op->flags & STARTTIMER) && op->kt_ival1)
next reply other threads:[~2026-07-20 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-20 15:13 gregkh [this message]
2026-07-24 8:37 ` [PATCH 2/9] can: bcm: add locking when updating filter and timer values Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-28 16:39 ` [PATCH 5.15.y v2 1/9] can: bcm: defer rx_op deallocation to workqueue to fix thrtimer UAF Oliver Hartkopp
2026-07-29 3:17 ` Sasha Levin
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=2026072013-groggily-broker-cca7@gregkh \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=mkl@pengutronix.de \
--cc=socketcan@hartkopp.net \
--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