On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 9:21 PM Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 21:08:05 -0800 Cong Wang wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 12:55 PM Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 17:30:49 -0800 Cong Wang wrote:
> > > > From: Cong Wang <cong.w...@bytedance.com>
> > > >
> > > > dev_ifsioc_locked() is called with only RCU read lock, so when
> > > > there is a parallel writer changing the mac address, it could
> > > > get a partially updated mac address, as shown below:
> > > >
> > > > Thread 1 Thread 2
> > > > // eth_commit_mac_addr_change()
> > > > memcpy(dev->dev_addr, addr->sa_data, ETH_ALEN);
> > > > // dev_ifsioc_locked()
> > > > memcpy(ifr->ifr_hwaddr.sa_data,
> > > > dev->dev_addr,...);
> > > >
> > > > Close this race condition by guarding them with a RW semaphore,
> > > > like netdev_get_name(). The writers take RTNL anyway, so this
> > > > will not affect the slow path.
> > > >
> > > > Fixes: 3710becf8a58 ("net: RCU locking for simple ioctl()")
> > > > Reported-by: "Gong, Sishuai" <sish...@purdue.edu>
> > > > Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.w...@bytedance.com>
> > >
> > > The addition of the write lock scares me a little for a fix, there's a
> > > lot of code which can potentially run under the callbacks and notifiers
> > > there.
> > >
> > > What about using a seqlock?
> >
> > Actually I did use seqlock in my initial version (not posted), it does not
> > allow blocking inside write_seqlock() protection, so I have to change
> > to rwsem.
>
> Argh, you're right. No way we can construct something that tries to
> read once and if it fails falls back to waiting for RTNL?
I don't think there is any way to tell whether the read fails, a partially
updated address can not be detected without additional flags etc..
And devnet_rename_sem is already there, pretty much similar to this
one.
Thanks.
