mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hawkins Jiawei <yin31149@gmail.com>
To: kuba@kernel.org
Cc: 18801353760@163.com, cong.wang@bytedance.com,
	davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, jhs@mojatatu.com,
	jiri@resnulli.us, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
	syzbot+232ebdbd36706c965ebf@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
	syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com,
	yin31149@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: sched: fix memory leak in tcindex_set_parms
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 20:10:10 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221116121010.101577-1-yin31149@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221115184442.272b6ea8@kernel.org>

On Wed, 16 Nov 2022 at 10:44, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 19:57:10 +0100 Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > This code confuses me more than a bit, and I don't follow ?!?
>
> It's very confusing :S
>
> For starters I don't know when r != old_r. I mean now it triggers
> randomly after the RCU-ification, but in the original code when
> it was just a memset(). When would old_r ever not be null and yet
> point to a different entry?

I am also confused about the code when I tried to fix this bug.

As for when `old_r != r`, according to the simplified
code below, this should be probably true if `p->perfect` is true
or `!p->perfect && !pc->h` is true(please correct me if I am wrong)

        struct tcindex_filter_result new_filter_result, *old_r = r;
        struct tcindex_data *cp = NULL, *oldp;
        struct tcf_result cr = {};

        /* tcindex_data attributes must look atomic to classifier/lookup so
         * allocate new tcindex data and RCU assign it onto root. Keeping
         * perfect hash and hash pointers from old data.
         */
        cp = kzalloc(sizeof(*cp), GFP_KERNEL);

        if (p->perfect) {
                if (tcindex_alloc_perfect_hash(net, cp) < 0)
                        goto errout;
                ...
        }
        cp->h = p->h;

        if (!cp->perfect && !cp->h) {
                if (valid_perfect_hash(cp)) {
                        if (tcindex_alloc_perfect_hash(net, cp) < 0)
                                goto errout_alloc;

                } else {
                        struct tcindex_filter __rcu **hash;

                        hash = kcalloc(cp->hash,
                                       sizeof(struct tcindex_filter *),
                                       GFP_KERNEL);

                        if (!hash)
                                goto errout_alloc;

                        cp->h = hash;
                }
        }
        ...

        if (cp->perfect)
                r = cp->perfect + handle;
        else
                r = tcindex_lookup(cp, handle) ? : &new_filter_result;

        if (old_r && old_r != r) {
                err = tcindex_filter_result_init(old_r, cp, net);
                if (err < 0) {
                        kfree(f);
                        goto errout_alloc;
                }
        }

* If `p->perfect` is true, tcindex_alloc_perfect_hash() newly
alloctes cp->perfect.

* If `!p->perfect && !p->h` is true, cp->perfect or cp->h is
newly allocated.

In either case, r probably points to the newly allocated memory,
which should not equals to the old_r.

>
> > it looks like that at this point:
> >
> > * the data path could access 'old_r->exts' contents via 'p' just before
> > the previous 'tcindex_filter_result_init(old_r, cp, net);' but still
> > potentially within the same RCU grace period
> >
> > * 'tcindex_filter_result_init(old_r, cp, net);' has 'unlinked' the old
> > exts from 'p'  so that will not be freed by later
> > tcindex_partial_destroy_work()
> >
> > Overall it looks to me that we need some somewhat wait for the RCU
> > grace period,
>
> Isn't it better to make @cp a deeper copy of @p ?
> I thought it already is but we don't seem to be cloning p->h.
> Also the cloning of p->perfect looks quite lossy.

Yes, I also think @cp should be a deeper copy of @p.

But it seems that in tcindex_alloc_perfect_hash(),
each @cp ->exts will be initialized by tcf_exts_init()
as below, and tcindex_set_parms() forgets to free the
old ->exts content, triggering this memory leak.(Please
correct me if I am wrong)

        static int tcindex_alloc_perfect_hash(struct net *net,
                                              struct tcindex_data *cp)
        {
        	int i, err = 0;
        
        	cp->perfect = kcalloc(cp->hash, sizeof(struct tcindex_filter_result),
        			      GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
        
        	for (i = 0; i < cp->hash; i++) {
        		err = tcf_exts_init(&cp->perfect[i].exts, net,
        				    TCA_TCINDEX_ACT, TCA_TCINDEX_POLICE);
        		if (err < 0)
        			goto errout;
        		cp->perfect[i].p = cp;
        	}
        }

        static inline int tcf_exts_init(struct tcf_exts *exts, struct net *net,
        				int action, int police)
        {
        #ifdef CONFIG_NET_CLS_ACT
        	exts->type = 0;
        	exts->nr_actions = 0;
        	/* Note: we do not own yet a reference on net.
        	 * This reference might be taken later from tcf_exts_get_net().
        	 */
        	exts->net = net;
        	exts->actions = kcalloc(TCA_ACT_MAX_PRIO, sizeof(struct tc_action *),
        				GFP_KERNEL);
        	if (!exts->actions)
        		return -ENOMEM;
        #endif
        	exts->action = action;
        	exts->police = police;
        	return 0;
        }

>
> > Somewhat side question: it looks like that the 'perfect hashing' usage
> > is the root cause of the issue addressed here, and very likely is
> > afflicted by other problems, e.g. the data curruption in 'err =
> > tcindex_filter_result_init(old_r, cp, net);'.
> >
> > AFAICS 'perfect hashing' usage is a sort of optimization that the user-
> > space may trigger with some combination of the tcindex arguments. I'm
> > wondering if we could drop all perfect hashing related code?
>
> The thought of "how much of this can we delete" did cross my mind :)

  reply	other threads:[~2022-11-16 12:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-13 17:05 Hawkins Jiawei
2022-11-15 11:36 ` Paolo Abeni
2022-11-15 11:39   ` Dmitry Vyukov
2022-11-15 17:02 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-11-15 18:57   ` Paolo Abeni
2022-11-16  2:44     ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-11-16 12:10       ` Hawkins Jiawei [this message]
2022-11-16 13:21         ` Hawkins Jiawei
2022-11-16  7:35   ` Hawkins Jiawei

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20221116121010.101577-1-yin31149@gmail.com \
    --to=yin31149@gmail.com \
    --cc=18801353760@163.com \
    --cc=cong.wang@bytedance.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
    --cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=syzbot+232ebdbd36706c965ebf@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
    --cc=syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®