> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xin Long <lucien....@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2020 6:23 PM
> To: Tuong Tong Lien <tuong.t.l...@dektech.com.au>
> Cc: davem <da...@davemloft.net>; jma...@redhat.com; ma...@donjonn.com; Ying
> Xue <ying....@windriver.com>; network dev
> <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; tipc-discuss...@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: [tipc-discussion] [net-next] tipc: fix NULL pointer dereference
> in streaming
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2020 at 1:06 PM Tuong Lien <tuong.t.l...@dektech.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > syzbot found the following crash:
> >
> > general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
> > 0xdffffc0000000019: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
> > KASAN: null-ptr-deref in range [0x00000000000000c8-0x00000000000000cf]
> > CPU: 1 PID: 7060 Comm: syz-executor394 Not tainted 5.7.0-rc6-syzkaller #0
> > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
> > Google 01/01/2011
> > RIP: 0010:__tipc_sendstream+0xbde/0x11f0 net/tipc/socket.c:1591
> > Code: 00 00 00 00 48 39 5c 24 28 48 0f 44 d8 e8 fa 3e db f9 48 b8 00 00 00
> > 00 00 fc ff df 48 8d bb c8 00 00 00 48 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 <80> 3c
> 02 00 0f 85 e2 04 00 00 48 8b 9b c8 00 00 00 48 b8 00 00 00
> > RSP: 0018:ffffc90003ef7818 EFLAGS: 00010202
> > RAX: dffffc0000000000 RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: ffffffff8797fd9d
> > RDX: 0000000000000019 RSI: ffffffff8797fde6 RDI: 00000000000000c8
> > RBP: ffff888099848040 R08: ffff88809a5f6440 R09: fffffbfff1860b4c
> > R10: ffffffff8c305a5f R11: fffffbfff1860b4b R12: ffff88809984857e
> > R13: 0000000000000000 R14: ffff888086aa4000 R15: 0000000000000000
> > FS: 00000000009b4880(0000) GS:ffff8880ae700000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> > CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> > CR2: 0000000020000140 CR3: 00000000a7fdf000 CR4: 00000000001406e0
> > DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000
> > DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400
> > Call Trace:
> > tipc_sendstream+0x4c/0x70 net/tipc/socket.c:1533
> > sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:652 [inline]
> > sock_sendmsg+0xcf/0x120 net/socket.c:672
> > ____sys_sendmsg+0x32f/0x810 net/socket.c:2352
> > ___sys_sendmsg+0x100/0x170 net/socket.c:2406
> > __sys_sendmmsg+0x195/0x480 net/socket.c:2496
> > __do_sys_sendmmsg net/socket.c:2525 [inline]
> > __se_sys_sendmmsg net/socket.c:2522 [inline]
> > __x64_sys_sendmmsg+0x99/0x100 net/socket.c:2522
> > do_syscall_64+0xf6/0x7d0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:295
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xb3
> > RIP: 0033:0x440199
> > ...
> >
> > This bug was bisected to commit 0a3e060f340d ("tipc: add test for Nagle
> > algorithm effectiveness"). However, it is not the case, the trouble was
> > from the base in the case of zero data length message sending, we would
> > unexpectedly make an empty 'txq' queue after the 'tipc_msg_append()' in
> > Nagle mode.
> >
> > A similar crash can be generated even without the bisected patch but at
> > the link layer when it accesses the empty queue.
> >
> > We solve the issues by building at least one buffer to go with socket's
> > header and an optional data section that may be empty like what we had
> > with the 'tipc_msg_build()'.
> >
> > Note: the previous commit 4c21daae3dbc ("tipc: Fix NULL pointer
> > dereference in __tipc_sendstream()") is obsoleted by this one since the
> > 'txq' will be never empty and the check of 'skb != NULL' is unnecessary
> > but it is safe anyway.
> Hi, Tuong
>
> If commit 4c21daae3dbc is obsoleted by this one, can you please
> send a patch to revert it?
>
> Thanks.
Hi Xin,
That patch includes a sanity check which is always true and safe, so I don’t
think
we need to revert it. Do you agree?
BR/Tuong
>
> >
> > Reported-by: syzbot+8eac6d030e7807c21...@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > Fixes: c0bceb97db9e ("tipc: add smart nagle feature")
> > Acked-by: Jon Maloy <jma...@redhat.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Tuong Lien <tuong.t.l...@dektech.com.au>
> > ---
> > net/tipc/msg.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/tipc/msg.c b/net/tipc/msg.c
> > index c0afcd627c5e..046e4cb3acea 100644
> > --- a/net/tipc/msg.c
> > +++ b/net/tipc/msg.c
> > @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ int tipc_msg_append(struct tipc_msg *_hdr, struct
> > msghdr *m, int dlen,
> > accounted = skb ? msg_blocks(buf_msg(skb)) : 0;
> > total = accounted;
> >
> > - while (rem) {
> > + do {
> > if (!skb || skb->len >= mss) {
> > skb = tipc_buf_acquire(mss, GFP_KERNEL);
> > if (unlikely(!skb))
> > @@ -245,7 +245,7 @@ int tipc_msg_append(struct tipc_msg *_hdr, struct
> > msghdr *m, int dlen,
> > skb_put(skb, cpy);
> > rem -= cpy;
> > total += msg_blocks(hdr) - curr;
> > - }
> > + } while (rem);
> > return total - accounted;
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.13.7
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > tipc-discussion mailing list
> > tipc-discuss...@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tipc-discussion
