Linux kernel -stable discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Nickolai Zeldovich <nickolai@csail.mit.edu>,
	Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org>,
	"Christian Brauner (Amutable)" <brauner@kernel.org>,
	Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 5.15.y 4/4] ucount: take the rlimit reference before checking the limit
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2026 17:41:25 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261110223252.3777469-4-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261110223252.3777469-1-sashal@kernel.org>

From: Nickolai Zeldovich <nickolai@csail.mit.edu>

[ Upstream commit b14fcabd34e02c40f72d3cd1e9bd4fd18df40ff1 ]

inc_rlimit_get_ucounts() takes the reference that pins a ucounts level
while its rlimit count is non-zero only in the walk whose increment is
the 0 -> 1 transition, and only after that walk passed the limit check.
A walk that raises the count from zero and then fails the limit backs
out without the reference, while a concurrent walk that raised it past
one keeps its increment and never takes one either:

  CPU0 (obeys the limit)              CPU1 (overrides it)
  new = add_return(1) -> 1
                                      new = add_return(1) -> 2
                                      new != 1, no get_ucounts()
  new > max -> dec_unwind
  sub_return(1) -> 1   (no put)

The count is 1 with no reference held. When CPU1 drops its charge,
dec_rlimit_put_ucounts() takes the count to 0 and puts a reference
nobody took, which frees the live struct ucounts, and the user_namespace
it pins, with kfree_rcu(). The mirror interleaving leaks the reference
instead.

An unprivileged user reaches this on a kernel with CONFIG_USER_NS=y: in
a user namespace with RLIMIT_SIGPENDING 0, one process taking
synchronous SIGSEGVs (forced, so override_rlimit is set) races a second
process in the same namespace and uid that queues real-time signals,
which obey the limit. The two hold different sighand->siglock but charge
the same per-namespace SIGPENDING ucounts. Unpatched, with rcuref
debugging:

  rcuref - imbalanced put()
  WARNING: lib/rcuref.c:266 at rcuref_put_slowpath+0xf4/0x120
   put_ucounts+0x5a/0x180
   do_dec_rlimit_put_ucounts+0x70/0x90
   __sigqueue_free+0x33/0xc0
   get_signal+0x56f/0xd20
   arch_do_signal_or_restart+0x87/0x380
   irqentry_exit+0x243/0x650
   asm_exc_page_fault+0x26/0x30

Take the reference on the 0 -> 1 transition before the limit is checked,
so the walk that raises the count from zero owns that level's reference
even when its request is rejected, and unwind a rejected level through
do_dec_rlimit_put_ucounts(), which releases the reference when the count
returns to 0. The get_ucounts() failure path is unchanged. With the
patch the same interleaving, forced some 80000 times in a KASAN build,
produces no warning and no KASAN report.

Fixes: 15bc01effefe ("ucounts: Fix signal ucount refcounting")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Nickolai Zeldovich <nickolai@csail.mit.edu>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20261019185913.805378-1-nickolai@csail.mit.edu
Acked-by: Alexey Gladkov <legion@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Christian Brauner (Amutable) <brauner@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/ucount.c | 21 ++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/ucount.c b/kernel/ucount.c
index 1459c1c579dc0..f483f83fc750e 100644
--- a/kernel/ucount.c
+++ b/kernel/ucount.c
@@ -311,23 +311,26 @@ long inc_rlimit_get_ucounts(struct ucounts *ucounts, enum rlimit_type type,
 
 	for (iter = ucounts; iter; iter = iter->ns->ucounts) {
 		long new = atomic_long_add_return(1, &iter->rlimit[type]);
-		if (new < 0 || new > max)
+		/*
+		 * Take the extra reference on the 0 -> 1 transition before the
+		 * limit check: a rejected walk must not leave a concurrent one
+		 * holding the surviving increment with no reference.
+		 */
+		if (new == 1 && !get_ucounts(iter))
 			goto dec_unwind;
+		if (new < 0 || new > max) {
+			/* undo iter too, releasing the reference taken above */
+			do_dec_rlimit_put_ucounts(ucounts, iter->ns->ucounts, type);
+			return 0;
+		}
 		if (iter == ucounts)
 			ret = new;
 		if (!override_rlimit)
 			max = get_userns_rlimit_max(iter->ns, type);
-		/*
-		 * Grab an extra ucount reference for the caller when
-		 * the rlimit count was previously 0.
-		 */
-		if (new != 1)
-			continue;
-		if (!get_ucounts(iter))
-			goto dec_unwind;
 	}
 	return ret;
 dec_unwind:
+	/* get_ucounts() failed for iter: undo iter without a put */
 	dec = atomic_long_sub_return(1, &iter->rlimit[type]);
 	WARN_ON_ONCE(dec < 0);
 	do_dec_rlimit_put_ucounts(ucounts, iter, type);
-- 
2.53.0


      parent reply	other threads:[~2026-11-10 22:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-11-07 11:10 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] ucount: take the rlimit reference before checking the limit" failed to apply to 5.15-stable tree Sasha Levin
2026-11-07 13:56 ` Alexey Gladkov
2026-11-10 22:41 ` [PATCH 5.15.y 1/4] ucounts: Use atomic_long_sub_return for clarity Sasha Levin
2026-11-10 22:41   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 2/4] ucounts: Split rlimit and ucount values and max values Sasha Levin
2026-11-10 22:41   ` [PATCH 5.15.y 3/4] signal: restore the override_rlimit logic Sasha Levin
2026-11-10 22:41   ` Sasha Levin [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=20261110223252.3777469-4-sashal@kernel.org \
    --to=sashal@kernel.org \
    --cc=brauner@kernel.org \
    --cc=legion@kernel.org \
    --cc=nickolai@csail.mit.edu \
    --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