On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:23 PM, Neil Horman <nhor...@tuxdriver.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 12:41:29PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>> Commit cd2b70875058 ("sctp: check duplicate node before inserting a
>> new transport") called rhltable_lookup() to check for the duplicate
>> transport node in transport rhashtable.
>>
>> But rhltable_lookup() doesn't call rcu_read_lock inside, it could cause
>> a use-after-free issue if it tries to dereference the node that another
>> cpu has freed it. Note that sock lock can not avoid this as it is per
>> sock.
>>
>> This patch is to fix it by calling rcu_read_lock before checking for
>> duplicate transport nodes.
>>
>> Fixes: cd2b70875058 ("sctp: check duplicate node before inserting a new
>> transport")
>> Reported-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyk...@google.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien....@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> net/sctp/input.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/sctp/input.c b/net/sctp/input.c
>> index fc45896..2a28ab2 100644
>> --- a/net/sctp/input.c
>> +++ b/net/sctp/input.c
>> @@ -884,14 +884,17 @@ int sctp_hash_transport(struct sctp_transport *t)
>> arg.paddr = &t->ipaddr;
>> arg.lport = htons(t->asoc->base.bind_addr.port);
>>
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> list = rhltable_lookup(&sctp_transport_hashtable, &arg,
>> sctp_hash_params);
>>
>> rhl_for_each_entry_rcu(transport, tmp, list, node)
>> if (transport->asoc->ep == t->asoc->ep) {
>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>> err = -EEXIST;
>> goto out;
>> }
>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>>
>> err = rhltable_insert_key(&sctp_transport_hashtable, &arg,
>> &t->node, sctp_hash_params);
>> --
>> 2.1.0
>>
>>
>
> Hmm, rhltable_insert_key I think returns a pointer to the existing object in
> the
> hash table if there is a collision (according to the _rhashtable_insert_fast
> description). Wouldn't it be better to eliminate the rhl_for_each_entry_rcu
> entirely, and just check the returned pointer from rhltable_insert_key?
I wish it could do it, but rhlist(rhltable_insert_key) allows duplicate
node to be inserted, it will never return the existing node. :(
I guess the codes you saw are only for the old rhashtable api (they are
together with rhlist codes in __rhashtable_insert_fast).
Thanks
>
> Neil
>
