From: Qing Wang <wangqing7171@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Qing Wang <wangqing7171@gmail.com>,
syzbot+b4c5ad098c821bf8d8bc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: [PATCH v2] bpf: Fix use-after-free in __bpf_trace_run()
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2026 17:23:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260304092345.233522-1-wangqing7171@gmail.com> (raw)
A use-after-free issue reported from syzbot exists in __bpf_trace_run().
BUG: KASAN: slab-use-after-free in __bpf_trace_run kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c:2075 [inline]
-> struct bpf_prog *prog = link->link.prog;
The link(struct bpf_raw_tp_link) was freed before accessing
link->link.prog.
The root cause is that: When bpf_probe_unregister() is called, tasks may
have already entered the old tp_probes array (RCU read-side section)
before rcu_assign_pointer() updates tp->funcs. These tasks can access the
link through the old array. Without synchronization, the link can be freed
via call_rcu() after bpf_probe_unregister() in bpf_link_free(), leading to
use-after-free in __bpf_trace_run().
CPU 0 (free link) CPU 1 (enter old tp probe)
───────────────── ────────────────────────
rcu_read_lock()
old_funcs = tp->funcs
bpf_raw_tp_link_release()
bpf_probe_unregister()
rcu_assign_pointer(tp->funcs, new)
call_srcu/call_rcu_tasks_trace(old_tp)
...
call_rcu/call_rcu_tasks_trace(&link->rcu, ...)
(RCU grace period)
kfree(link)
__bpf_trace_run(link, ...)
access link->link.prog
UAF!
Fix by calling tracepoint_synchronize_unregister() to ensure all
in-flight tracepoint callbacks have completed, so the link is no
longer reachable before it is freed.
The issue was introduced by commit d4dfc5700e86 ("bpf:
pass whole link instead of prog when triggering raw tracepoint"),
which changed tracepoint callbacks to receive bpf_raw_tp_link pointers
instead of bpf_prog pointers.
Prior to this commit, this issue did not occur because the bpf_prog was
directly used and protected by reference counting.
Fixes: d4dfc5700e86 ("bpf: pass whole link instead of prog when triggering raw tracepoint")
Reported-by: syzbot+b4c5ad098c821bf8d8bc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=b4c5ad098c821bf8d8bc
Tested-by: syzbot+b4c5ad098c821bf8d8bc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Qing Wang <wangqing7171@gmail.com>
---
Changes in v2:
- Modified commit message from bpf-ci AI reviewed.
- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260304070927.178464-1-wangqing7171@gmail.com/T/
kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
index 0378e83b4099..dd491bc35027 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
@@ -3783,6 +3783,13 @@ static void bpf_raw_tp_link_release(struct bpf_link *link)
bpf_probe_unregister(raw_tp->btp, raw_tp);
bpf_put_raw_tracepoint(raw_tp->btp);
+
+ /*
+ * Wait for all in-flight tracepoint callbacks to complete so the
+ * link is no longer reachable through tp_probes. This prevents
+ * use-after-free in __bpf_trace_run() when a tracepoint fires.
+ */
+ tracepoint_synchronize_unregister();
}
static void bpf_raw_tp_link_dealloc(struct bpf_link *link)
--
2.34.1
next reply other threads:[~2026-03-04 9:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-04 9:23 Qing Wang [this message]
2026-03-05 1:38 ` Jordan Rife
2026-03-05 7:16 ` Qing Wang
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=20260304092345.233522-1-wangqing7171@gmail.com \
--to=wangqing7171@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=syzbot+b4c5ad098c821bf8d8bc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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®