On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 02:38:26PM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> From: Stefano Garzarella <[email protected]>
> 
> vhost_vsock_get() uses hash_for_each_possible_rcu() to find the
> `vhost_vsock` associated with the `guest_cid`. hash_for_each_possible_rcu()
> should only be called within an RCU read section, as mentioned in the
> following comment in include/linux/rculist.h:
> 
> /**
>  * hlist_for_each_entry_rcu - iterate over rcu list of given type
>  * @pos:      the type * to use as a loop cursor.
>  * @head:     the head for your list.
>  * @member:   the name of the hlist_node within the struct.
>  * @cond:     optional lockdep expression if called from non-RCU protection.
>  *
>  * This list-traversal primitive may safely run concurrently with
>  * the _rcu list-mutation primitives such as hlist_add_head_rcu()
>  * as long as the traversal is guarded by rcu_read_lock().
>  */
> 
> Currently, all calls to vhost_vsock_get() are between rcu_read_lock()
> and rcu_read_unlock() except for calls in vhost_vsock_set_cid() and
> vhost_vsock_reset_orphans(). In both cases, the current code is safe,
> but we can make improvements to make it more robust.
> 
> About vhost_vsock_set_cid(), when building the kernel with
> CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST enabled, we get the following RCU warning when the
> user space issues `ioctl(dev, VHOST_VSOCK_SET_GUEST_CID, ...)` :
> 
>   WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
>   6.18.0-rc7 #62 Not tainted
>   -----------------------------
>   drivers/vhost/vsock.c:74 RCU-list traversed in non-reader section!!
> 
>   other info that might help us debug this:
> 
>   rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1
>   1 lock held by rpc-libvirtd/3443:
>    #0: ffffffffc05032a8 (vhost_vsock_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: 
> vhost_vsock_dev_ioctl+0x2ff/0x530 [vhost_vsock]
> 
>   stack backtrace:
>   CPU: 2 UID: 0 PID: 3443 Comm: rpc-libvirtd Not tainted 6.18.0-rc7 #62 
> PREEMPT(none)
>   Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.17.0-7.fc42 
> 06/10/2025
>   Call Trace:
>    <TASK>
>    dump_stack_lvl+0x75/0xb0
>    dump_stack+0x14/0x1a
>    lockdep_rcu_suspicious.cold+0x4e/0x97
>    vhost_vsock_get+0x8f/0xa0 [vhost_vsock]
>    vhost_vsock_dev_ioctl+0x307/0x530 [vhost_vsock]
>    __x64_sys_ioctl+0x4f2/0xa00
>    x64_sys_call+0xed0/0x1da0
>    do_syscall_64+0x73/0xfa0
>    entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
>    ...
>    </TASK>
> 
> This is not a real problem, because the vhost_vsock_get() caller, i.e.
> vhost_vsock_set_cid(), holds the `vhost_vsock_mutex` used by the hash
> table writers. Anyway, to prevent that warning, add lockdep_is_held()
> condition to hash_for_each_possible_rcu() to verify that either the
> caller is in an RCU read section or `vhost_vsock_mutex` is held when
> CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST is enabled; and also clarify the comment for
> vhost_vsock_get() to better describe the locking requirements and the
> scope of the returned pointer validity.
> 
> About vhost_vsock_reset_orphans(), currently this function is only
> called via vsock_for_each_connected_socket(), which holds the
> `vsock_table_lock` spinlock (which is also an RCU read-side critical
> section). However, add an explicit RCU read lock there to make the code
> more robust and explicit about the RCU requirements, and to prevent
> issues if the calling context changes in the future or if
> vhost_vsock_reset_orphans() is called from other contexts.
> 
> Fixes: 834e772c8db0 ("vhost/vsock: fix use-after-free in network stack 
> callers")
> Cc: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <[email protected]>


queued, thanks!

> ---
>  drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 15 +++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c
> index ae01457ea2cd..78cc66fbb3dd 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c
> @@ -64,14 +64,15 @@ static u32 vhost_transport_get_local_cid(void)
>       return VHOST_VSOCK_DEFAULT_HOST_CID;
>  }
>  
> -/* Callers that dereference the return value must hold vhost_vsock_mutex or 
> the
> - * RCU read lock.
> +/* Callers must be in an RCU read section or hold the vhost_vsock_mutex.
> + * The return value can only be dereferenced while within the section.
>   */
>  static struct vhost_vsock *vhost_vsock_get(u32 guest_cid)
>  {
>       struct vhost_vsock *vsock;
>  
> -     hash_for_each_possible_rcu(vhost_vsock_hash, vsock, hash, guest_cid) {
> +     hash_for_each_possible_rcu(vhost_vsock_hash, vsock, hash, guest_cid,
> +                                lockdep_is_held(&vhost_vsock_mutex)) {
>               u32 other_cid = vsock->guest_cid;
>  
>               /* Skip instances that have no CID yet */
> @@ -707,9 +708,15 @@ static void vhost_vsock_reset_orphans(struct sock *sk)
>        * executing.
>        */
>  
> +     rcu_read_lock();
> +
>       /* If the peer is still valid, no need to reset connection */
> -     if (vhost_vsock_get(vsk->remote_addr.svm_cid))
> +     if (vhost_vsock_get(vsk->remote_addr.svm_cid)) {
> +             rcu_read_unlock();
>               return;
> +     }
> +
> +     rcu_read_unlock();
>  
>       /* If the close timeout is pending, let it expire.  This avoids races
>        * with the timeout callback.
> -- 
> 2.51.1


Reply via email to