On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 11:42 PM Jason Wang <jasow...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 2019/4/23 下午2:00, Cong Wang wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 2:41 AM Jason Wang <jasow...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2019/4/22 上午11:57, YueHaibing wrote:
> >>> We get a KASAN report as below, but don't have any reproducer.
> >>>
> >>> Any comments are appreciated.
> >>>
> >>> ==================================================================
> >>> BUG: KASAN: use-after-free in tun_net_xmit+0x1670/0x1750
> >>> drivers/net/tun.c:1104
> >>> Read of size 8 at addr ffff88836cc26a70 by task swapper/3/0
> >>
> >> Which kernel version did you use? The calltrace points out the a use
> >> after free for tun_file structure which should be synchronized through
> >> RCU + RTNL lock.
> > The tfile socket has to be marked with SOCK_RCU_FREE in order
> > to fully respect the RCU grace period.
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
> > index e9ca1c088d0b..31c3210288cb 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
> > @@ -3431,6 +3431,7 @@ static int tun_chr_open(struct inode *inode,
> > struct file * file)
> > file->private_data = tfile;
> > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&tfile->next);
> >
> > + sock_set_flag(&tfile->sk, SOCK_RCU_FREE);
> > sock_set_flag(&tfile->sk, SOCK_ZEROCOPY);
> >
> > return 0;
>
>
> We did a synchronize_net() when socket is detached from netdevice in
> __tun_detach() so it looks to me this is unnecessary.
I knew, but it is only called conditionally, that is:
695 if (tun && !tfile->detached) {
...
710
711 synchronize_net();
And it looks like syzbot just skipped this condition, this is why I believe
you still need to respect RCU grace period _unconditionally_ for tfile.
Thanks.
