lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Mar]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: general protection fault in raw_seq_start
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 11:55 PM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com> wrote:

> Thanks for reporting the issue.
>
> It seems we need to use RCU variant in raw_get_first().
> I'll post a patch.
>
> ---
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/raw.c b/net/ipv4/raw.c
> index 3cf68695b40d..fe0d1ad20b35 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/raw.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/raw.c
> @@ -957,7 +957,7 @@ static struct sock *raw_get_first(struct seq_file *seq, int bucket)
> for (state->bucket = bucket; state->bucket < RAW_HTABLE_SIZE;
> ++state->bucket) {
> hlist = &h->ht[state->bucket];
> - sk_nulls_for_each(sk, hnode, hlist) {
> + sk_nulls_for_each_rcu(sk, hnode, hlist) {
> if (sock_net(sk) == seq_file_net(seq))
> return sk;
>

No, we do not want this.
You missed that sk_nulls_for_each_rcu() needs a specific protocol
(see Documentation/RCU/rculist_nulls.rst for details)

RCU is needed in the data path, not for this control path.

My patch went too far in the RCU conversion. I did not think about
syzbot harassing /proc files :)

We need raw_seq_start and friends to go back to use the lock.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-03-31 09:06    [W:0.838 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site