[net] sctp: deny peeloff operation on asocs with threads sleeping on it
diff mbox

Message ID e3adb3f22270407764cfbeb1adb7e4c95cf42cbb.1487800862.git.marcelo.leitner@gmail.com
State Accepted, archived
Delegated to: David Miller
Headers show

Commit Message

Marcelo Ricardo Leitner Feb. 23, 2017, 12:31 p.m. UTC
commit 2dcab5984841 ("sctp: avoid BUG_ON on sctp_wait_for_sndbuf")
attempted to avoid a BUG_ON call when the association being used for a
sendmsg() is blocked waiting for more sndbuf and another thread did a
peeloff operation on such asoc, moving it to another socket.

As Ben Hutchings noticed, then in such case it would return without
locking back the socket and would cause two unlocks in a row.

Further analysis also revealed that it could allow a double free if the
application managed to peeloff the asoc that is created during the
sendmsg call, because then sctp_sendmsg() would try to free the asoc
that was created only for that call.

This patch takes another approach. It will deny the peeloff operation
if there is a thread sleeping on the asoc, so this situation doesn't
exist anymore. This avoids the issues described above and also honors
the syscalls that are already being handled (it can be multiple sendmsg
calls).

Joint work with Xin Long.

Fixes: 2dcab5984841 ("sctp: avoid BUG_ON on sctp_wait_for_sndbuf")
Cc: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@linux.com>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
---
Hi, please consider this one for -stable too. Thanks

 net/sctp/socket.c | 8 ++++++--
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comments

David Miller Feb. 24, 2017, 4:11 p.m. UTC | #1
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:31:18 -0300

> commit 2dcab5984841 ("sctp: avoid BUG_ON on sctp_wait_for_sndbuf")
> attempted to avoid a BUG_ON call when the association being used for a
> sendmsg() is blocked waiting for more sndbuf and another thread did a
> peeloff operation on such asoc, moving it to another socket.
> 
> As Ben Hutchings noticed, then in such case it would return without
> locking back the socket and would cause two unlocks in a row.
> 
> Further analysis also revealed that it could allow a double free if the
> application managed to peeloff the asoc that is created during the
> sendmsg call, because then sctp_sendmsg() would try to free the asoc
> that was created only for that call.
> 
> This patch takes another approach. It will deny the peeloff operation
> if there is a thread sleeping on the asoc, so this situation doesn't
> exist anymore. This avoids the issues described above and also honors
> the syscalls that are already being handled (it can be multiple sendmsg
> calls).
> 
> Joint work with Xin Long.
> 
> Fixes: 2dcab5984841 ("sctp: avoid BUG_ON on sctp_wait_for_sndbuf")
> Cc: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@linux.com>
> Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
> ---
> Hi, please consider this one for -stable too. Thanks

Applied and queued up for -stable, thanks.

Patch
diff mbox

diff --git a/net/sctp/socket.c b/net/sctp/socket.c
index 1b5d669e30292a57ed57dd920d81be2a57f97b22..d04a8b66098c8a574642b026bff990ac64c21468 100644
--- a/net/sctp/socket.c
+++ b/net/sctp/socket.c
@@ -4734,6 +4734,12 @@  int sctp_do_peeloff(struct sock *sk, sctp_assoc_t id, struct socket **sockp)
 	if (!asoc)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
+	/* If there is a thread waiting on more sndbuf space for
+	 * sending on this asoc, it cannot be peeled.
+	 */
+	if (waitqueue_active(&asoc->wait))
+		return -EBUSY;
+
 	/* An association cannot be branched off from an already peeled-off
 	 * socket, nor is this supported for tcp style sockets.
 	 */
@@ -7426,8 +7432,6 @@  static int sctp_wait_for_sndbuf(struct sctp_association *asoc, long *timeo_p,
 		 */
 		release_sock(sk);
 		current_timeo = schedule_timeout(current_timeo);
-		if (sk != asoc->base.sk)
-			goto do_error;
 		lock_sock(sk);
 
 		*timeo_p = current_timeo;