mirror of
https://mirrors.bfsu.edu.cn/git/linux.git
synced 2024-11-23 12:14:10 +08:00
tcp: prevent concurrent execution of tcp_sk_exit_batch
Its possible that two threads call tcp_sk_exit_batch() concurrently, once from the cleanup_net workqueue, once from a task that failed to clone a new netns. In the latter case, error unwinding calls the exit handlers in reverse order for the 'failed' netns. tcp_sk_exit_batch() calls tcp_twsk_purge(). Problem is that since commitb099ce2602
("net: Batch inet_twsk_purge"), this function picks up twsk in any dying netns, not just the one passed in via exit_batch list. This means that the error unwind of setup_net() can "steal" and destroy timewait sockets belonging to the exiting netns. This allows the netns exit worker to proceed to call WARN_ON_ONCE(!refcount_dec_and_test(&net->ipv4.tcp_death_row.tw_refcount)); without the expected 1 -> 0 transition, which then splats. At same time, error unwind path that is also running inet_twsk_purge() will splat as well: WARNING: .. at lib/refcount.c:31 refcount_warn_saturate+0x1ed/0x210 ... refcount_dec include/linux/refcount.h:351 [inline] inet_twsk_kill+0x758/0x9c0 net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c:70 inet_twsk_deschedule_put net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c:221 inet_twsk_purge+0x725/0x890 net/ipv4/inet_timewait_sock.c:304 tcp_sk_exit_batch+0x1c/0x170 net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c:3522 ops_exit_list+0x128/0x180 net/core/net_namespace.c:178 setup_net+0x714/0xb40 net/core/net_namespace.c:375 copy_net_ns+0x2f0/0x670 net/core/net_namespace.c:508 create_new_namespaces+0x3ea/0xb10 kernel/nsproxy.c:110 ... because refcount_dec() of tw_refcount unexpectedly dropped to 0. This doesn't seem like an actual bug (no tw sockets got lost and I don't see a use-after-free) but as erroneous trigger of debug check. Add a mutex to force strict ordering: the task that calls tcp_twsk_purge() blocks other task from doing final _dec_and_test before mutex-owner has removed all tw sockets of dying netns. Fixes:e9bd0cca09
("tcp: Don't allocate tcp_death_row outside of struct netns_ipv4.") Reported-by: syzbot+8ea26396ff85d23a8929@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/0000000000003a5292061f5e4e19@google.com/ Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240812140104.GA21559@breakpoint.cc/ Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> Reviewed-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com> Reviewed-by: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20240812222857.29837-1-fw@strlen.de Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
1e557246f8
commit
565d121b69
@ -97,6 +97,8 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct sock_bh_locked, ipv4_tcp_sk) = {
|
||||
.bh_lock = INIT_LOCAL_LOCK(bh_lock),
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
static DEFINE_MUTEX(tcp_exit_batch_mutex);
|
||||
|
||||
static u32 tcp_v4_init_seq(const struct sk_buff *skb)
|
||||
{
|
||||
return secure_tcp_seq(ip_hdr(skb)->daddr,
|
||||
@ -3514,6 +3516,16 @@ static void __net_exit tcp_sk_exit_batch(struct list_head *net_exit_list)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct net *net;
|
||||
|
||||
/* make sure concurrent calls to tcp_sk_exit_batch from net_cleanup_work
|
||||
* and failed setup_net error unwinding path are serialized.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* tcp_twsk_purge() handles twsk in any dead netns, not just those in
|
||||
* net_exit_list, the thread that dismantles a particular twsk must
|
||||
* do so without other thread progressing to refcount_dec_and_test() of
|
||||
* tcp_death_row.tw_refcount.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
mutex_lock(&tcp_exit_batch_mutex);
|
||||
|
||||
tcp_twsk_purge(net_exit_list);
|
||||
|
||||
list_for_each_entry(net, net_exit_list, exit_list) {
|
||||
@ -3521,6 +3533,8 @@ static void __net_exit tcp_sk_exit_batch(struct list_head *net_exit_list)
|
||||
WARN_ON_ONCE(!refcount_dec_and_test(&net->ipv4.tcp_death_row.tw_refcount));
|
||||
tcp_fastopen_ctx_destroy(net);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
mutex_unlock(&tcp_exit_batch_mutex);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static struct pernet_operations __net_initdata tcp_sk_ops = {
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user