From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E8DA63BA24E for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 12:31:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789561865; cv=none; b=oCSz5KMwptiEfGfGTuOS5o0qBBhsCH6m5vQ9cG4e6VziTgg2VYWQsWN9vv9ovvtJbGFf8wjV9DxGPP43BjzmSr/hopNKdcb4OJWa2/ENxwjiJjzp/B67HK8ugNke33pFDipgEuokVF0rikdTEExSb6xoHLZ+oMHw1GzP19Xz0AM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789561865; c=relaxed/simple; bh=XGXi9MYz+h2MYHPVx7/i/kQbavA7JbRWDIW6+ytE058=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Disposition; b=rNrqer6bk9FVlxxczUpQ7/ndaQIq/rwIb1wsczcDw/SvbPO1IdqnVEAgFnbPqtfpeso40t48ZMUPykqKhXjQnJMCeEJpReqDF7jBuOz0WHNMkmnXLhtryeaUI2Qoalol+TFoIQGC18smp/OYOm2fma6vbbBoxukK7EhTdwlE1TA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=DO74XkCq; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="DO74XkCq" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1789561862; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=pLMe/wNCn5zgtYuy3BxEIMyOkeNzl/Thlke2TpXOG+M=; b=DO74XkCqRa5oKucfYqETULuWcx29AwxpLw+x8C+mCU7iU4CfMXgl8b92rHocqDRcqG2fOE /0+gfXG22LTtxxOuyXGV2Ma3LWo2dXmLeM+oxxKlb6bG1ZualsdidBXYYN2jgraklxC9G7 DjOVw+FatpfUQ+cuwhmgtmw+cn9XBFE= Received: from mail-wm1-f70.google.com (mail-wm1-f70.google.com [209.85.128.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-648-MZKBCB2DPiiWTBcOzeu3Kw-1; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 08:31:01 -0400 X-MC-Unique: MZKBCB2DPiiWTBcOzeu3Kw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: MZKBCB2DPiiWTBcOzeu3Kw_1789561860 Received: by mail-wm1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49e6c17ec1dso47344065e9.2 for ; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 05:31:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1789561860; x=1790166660; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:content-type:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=pLMe/wNCn5zgtYuy3BxEIMyOkeNzl/Thlke2TpXOG+M=; b=RuOSgrF7M+KGuYGSOtCi92EyGomEAr+xez/OBbGraR6pMplKrTMJllT6kjii1rLyCz JLlmvQgxONticrTTLkayHNn0aInr1obrXr5Uw2PSkREYiMO7C28VOxzgPDpcYvhbuDn7 ZtGmLk2ilC5dAAmxl/2WUbueCbrbEF6FJFWZOUVlVwUVxlzSoqwk/jfxIMS8zA3cqrgx XuWC21NbEb88rC/NyVjv2u/SEXQ6gK8o72JkTmh+ygHLNMRb7c2wbWDABmEfg961Z9IM dAny+PkQIDXYCyq/ED7pmVUBOmO9fNlonTYwHP/czjB9+hc8okmZH2t5I5u9htJCNDvE W4ew== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBy2qhHpve4X3ZihiY0JJK86PknfZr5WeQu/TLBxoxnysw/CVcESqUgH5mGdXPaMrA7FtjmwgXoxvR8h90XPSQ==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++nhrBWUvRtYvj1+OnH6CpIAOy+OIOszYxBVBTAkovk/qVHf+ECg DEYu0LemeEQKlOFKq8GAkCutdeFVjIWThFwMpKDDQhjbiI1JQxiQwJNXNQadVuLZEivPs+lwB39 te0ojdzLatCdl2sT0le1TDMcr8EQ3RuIOhg7bhUINvAyRGeke2/NtNkmIzHLHV20JiOFE X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou2Y7NoAw/kRpl0OQ/kP+gkLWwvOvEBZ5ZcZzGdnlQ8hg9m9S4hyYEh5Tug+Ui/ uq+6kOcynhvmgOUnh2qD74GXbs3ZZqwC8UKxj8VMxSPn21GyYY7XDgolzHsFSvkNr9ohR+FSaW2 zFd9u6EPNB6tJtNWTYNXlXyk+vHZuLGvZMnf6LK3OwnXh8Vj7A3R2F5gGsarNwfD+8L1WoYmmqS DJJBjkWHb1JqcrA5OpQcuBiYfKVrXBD0uNQ2Zy3sJ/Mp2agMwsHBGHongvLD2jYg1hpKqa88Cd+ cobKkG3mRTP09wfFIulqsJT46+uYUs+hCkO7p7nkEhPP5Gnng221Hdyf3CadB1eH3zB5Yn43VOs qtgNqnO/MHESLFika8UUn7z0zrUVeRzOhZZcjZTZDx6BUNg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:6296:b0:49e:602a:b4ec with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49eb730e225mr61109825e9.8.1789561859690; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 05:30:59 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:6296:b0:49e:602a:b4ec with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49eb730e225mr61107955e9.8.1789561859097; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 05:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sgarzare-redhat (host-79-53-30-11.retail.telecomitalia.it. [79.53.30.11]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-49e83d903f6sm72500905e9.4.2026.09.16.05.30.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 16 Sep 2026 05:30:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 14:30:55 +0200 From: Stefano Garzarella To: Michal Luczaj Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Jason Wang , Eugenio =?utf-8?B?UMOpcmV6?= , "David S. Miller" , Xuan Zhuo , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , Asias He , kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Hyunwoo Kim Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 4/5] vsock: Do not reset a TCP_CLOSING socket Message-ID: References: <20260915-vsock-connect-reset-closing-v2-0-a1d9abb472f7@rbox.co> <20260915-vsock-connect-reset-closing-v2-4-a1d9abb472f7@rbox.co> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: virtualization@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20260915-vsock-connect-reset-closing-v2-4-a1d9abb472f7@rbox.co> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: oO5TGZJug7ns6qmx_Tm0C3s_p4n6KTLgX4Q01miVD-s_1789561860 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline On Tue, Sep 15, 2026 at 03:15:15PM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote: >Handle the previously overlooked TCP_ESTABLISHED -> TCP_CLOSING >transition (on VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RST), which could race with the connect >loop. > >Resetting a socket that is still present in connected_table can lead to >memory corruption. The reporter noted lost transports for in-flight skbs, >and I have reproduced crashes caused by re-insertion into connected_table. > > list_add double add: new=, prev=, next=. > kernel BUG at lib/list_debug.c:35! > Oops: invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN NOPTI > Workqueue: vsock-loopback vsock_loopback_work > RIP: 0010:__list_add_valid_or_report+0x11f/0x130 > Call Trace: > vsock_insert_connected.cold+0xe/0x13 > virtio_transport_recv_pkt+0x10e9/0x1460 > vsock_loopback_work+0x305/0x480 > process_one_work+0xe4c/0x1560 > worker_thread+0x4f1/0xd60 > kthread+0x36e/0x470 > ret_from_fork+0x47b/0x6b0 > ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 > >Drop the redundant err=0 and the inaccurate comment above signal_pending(). >This fix is supplementary to commit 002541ef650b ("vsock: Ignore >signal/timeout on connect() if already established"). Details under Link. > >Fixes: d021c344051a ("VSOCK: Introduce VM Sockets") >Reported-by: Hyunwoo Kim >Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/anzT1fREOSyHT99k@v4bel/ >Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj >--- > net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 20 +++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >index 499e902becfa..adf3f018347e 100644 >--- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >@@ -1712,7 +1712,6 @@ static int vsock_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr_unsized *addr, > long timeout; > DEFINE_WAIT(wait); > >- err = 0; > sk = sock->sk; > vsk = vsock_sk(sk); > >@@ -1834,23 +1833,22 @@ static int vsock_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr_unsized *addr, > timeout = schedule_timeout(timeout); > lock_sock(sk); > >- /* Connection established. Whatever happens to socket once we >- * release it, that's not connect()'s concern. No need to go >+ /* Connection was established. Whatever happens to socket once >+ * we release it, that's not connect()'s concern. No need to go > * into signal and timeout handling. Call it a day. > * > * Note that allowing to "reset" an already established socket > * here is racy and insecure. > */ >- if (sk->sk_state == TCP_ESTABLISHED) >- break; >+ if (sk->sk_state == TCP_ESTABLISHED || >+ sk->sk_state == TCP_CLOSING) { >+ err = 0; >+ goto out_wait; >+ } > > /* If connection was _not_ established and a signal/timeout came > * to be, we want the socket's state reset. User space may want > * to retry. >- * >- * sk_state != TCP_ESTABLISHED implies that socket is not on >- * vsock_connected_table. We keep the binding and the transport >- * assigned. Should we keep "We keep the binding and the transport assigned." or maybe add on the other phrase, "User space may want to retry, so we keep ..." > */ > if (signal_pending(current) || timeout == 0) { > err = timeout == 0 ? -ETIMEDOUT : sock_intr_errno(timeout); >@@ -1874,8 +1872,8 @@ static int vsock_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr_unsized *addr, > prepare_to_wait(sk_sleep(sk), &wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > } > >- err = sock_error(sk); >- if (err) { Should we add a comment here explaining why we are doing this? Thanks, Stefano >+ if (sk->sk_state != TCP_ESTABLISHED && sk->sk_state != TCP_CLOSING) { >+ err = sock_error(sk); > sk->sk_state = TCP_CLOSE; > sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > } > >-- >2.55.0 >