neighbour: Prevent a dead entry from updating gc_list
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 neighbour: Prevent a dead entry from updating gc_list
Following race condition was detected:
<CPU A, t0> - neigh_flush_dev() is under execution and calls neigh_mark_dead(n) marking the neighbour entry 'n' as dead.
<CPU B, t1> - Executing: __netif_receive_skb() -> __netif_receive_skb_core() -> arp_rcv() -> arp_process().arp_process() calls __neigh_lookup() which takes a reference on neighbour entry 'n'.
<CPU A, t2> - Moves further along neigh_flush_dev() and calls neigh_cleanup_and_release(n), but since reference count increased in t2, 'n' couldn't be destroyed.
<CPU B, t3> - Moves further along, arp_process() and calls neigh_update()-> __neigh_update() -> neigh_update_gc_list(), which adds the neighbour entry back in gc_list(neigh_mark_dead(), removed it earlier in t0 from gc_list)
<CPU B, t4> - arp_process() finally calls neigh_release(n), destroying the neighbour entry.
This leads to 'n' still being part of gc_list, but the actual neighbour structure has been freed.
The situation can be prevented from happening if we disallow a dead entry to have any possibility of updating gc_list. This is what the patch intends to achieve.
--- net/core/neighbour.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
net/core/neighbour.c +4 -3
@@ -1244,13 +1244,14 @@ static int __neigh_update(struct neighbour *neigh, const u8 *lladdr, old = neigh->nud_state; err = -EPERM ; -if (!(flags &NEIGH_UPDATE_F_ADMIN ) && - (old & (NUD_NOARP |NUD_PERMANENT ))) - goto out;if (neigh->dead) {NL_SET_ERR_MSG (extack,"Neighbor entry is now dead" ); + new = old; goto out; } +if (!(flags &NEIGH_UPDATE_F_ADMIN ) && + (old & (NUD_NOARP |NUD_PERMANENT ))) + goto out; ext_learn_change =neigh_update_ext_learned (neigh, flags, ¬ify);
Quoted 24 lines · Chinmay Agarwal
Following race condition was detected:
<CPU A, t0> -neigh_flush_dev()is under execution and callsneigh_mark_dead(n)marking the neighbour entry 'n' as dead.<CPU B, t1> - Executing:
__netif_receive_skb()->__netif_receive_skb_core()->arp_rcv()-> arp_process().arp_process() calls__neigh_lookup()which takes a reference on neighbour entry 'n'.<CPU A, t2> - Moves further along
neigh_flush_dev()and callsneigh_cleanup_and_release(n), but since reference count increased in t2, 'n' couldn't be destroyed.<CPU B, t3> - Moves further along,
arp_process()and calls neigh_update()->__neigh_update()->neigh_update_gc_list(), which adds the neighbour entry back ingc_list(neigh_mark_dead(), removed it earlier in t0 from gc_list)<CPU B, t4> -
arp_process()finally callsneigh_release(n), destroying the neighbour entry.This leads to 'n' still being part of
gc_list, but the actual neighbour structure has been freed.
Quoted 6 lines
The situation can be prevented from happening if we disallow a dead entry to have any possibility of updating
gc_list. This is what the patch intends to achieve.Fixes 9c29a2f55ec0 ("neighbor: Fix locking order for gc_list changes")Signed-off-by Chinmay Agarwal <[email protected]>
Thanks.
Quoted 20 lines · Chinmay Agarwal
Following race condition was detected:
<CPU A, t0> -neigh_flush_dev()is under execution and callsneigh_mark_dead(n)marking the neighbour entry 'n' as dead.<CPU B, t1> - Executing:
__netif_receive_skb()->__netif_receive_skb_core()->arp_rcv()-> arp_process().arp_process() calls__neigh_lookup()which takes a reference on neighbour entry 'n'.<CPU A, t2> - Moves further along
neigh_flush_dev()and callsneigh_cleanup_and_release(n), but since reference count increased in t2, 'n' couldn't be destroyed.<CPU B, t3> - Moves further along,
arp_process()and calls neigh_update()->__neigh_update()->neigh_update_gc_list(), which adds the neighbour entry back ingc_list(neigh_mark_dead(), removed it earlier in t0 from gc_list)<CPU B, t4> -
arp_process()finally callsneigh_release(n), destroying the neighbour entry.
Quoted 8 lines
This leads to 'n' still being part of
gc_list, but the actual neighbour structure has been freed.The situation can be prevented from happening if we disallow a dead entry to have any possibility of updating
gc_list. This is what the patch intends to achieve.Fixes 9c29a2f55ec0 ("neighbor: Fix locking order for gc_list changes")
always Cc the author(s) of commits in Fixes tag.
Quoted 5 lines
Signed-off-by Chinmay Agarwal <[email protected]>--- net/core/neighbour.c | 7 ++++--- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Quoted 23 lines · On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 22:24:54 +0530 Chinmay Agarwal wrote:
Following race condition was detected:
<CPU A, t0> -neigh_flush_dev()is under execution and callsneigh_mark_dead(n)marking the neighbour entry 'n' as dead.<CPU B, t1> - Executing:
__netif_receive_skb()->__netif_receive_skb_core()->arp_rcv()-> arp_process().arp_process() calls__neigh_lookup()which takes a reference on neighbour entry 'n'.<CPU A, t2> - Moves further along
neigh_flush_dev()and callsneigh_cleanup_and_release(n), but since reference count increased in t2, 'n' couldn't be destroyed.<CPU B, t3> - Moves further along,
arp_process()and calls neigh_update()->__neigh_update()->neigh_update_gc_list(), which adds the neighbour entry back ingc_list(neigh_mark_dead(), removed it earlier in t0 from gc_list)<CPU B, t4> -
arp_process()finally callsneigh_release(n), destroying the neighbour entry.This leads to 'n' still being part of
gc_list, but the actual neighbour structure has been freed.
Quoted 6 lines
The situation can be prevented from happening if we disallow a dead entry to have any possibility of updating
gc_list. This is what the patch intends to achieve.Fixes 9c29a2f55ec0 ("neighbor: Fix locking order for gc_list changes")Signed-off-by Chinmay Agarwal <[email protected]>
Applied, thanks!