From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH net v9 07/14] rxrpc: Fix update of call->tx_pending without holding lock
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2026 12:37:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260907113743.1453210-8-dhowells@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260907113743.1453210-1-dhowells@redhat.com>
Currently, rxrpc_send_data() updates call->tx_pending just before it
returns - but it won't be holding the call->user_mutex when it does this if
a wait was interrupted by a signal. This would allow a parallel sendmsg()
to race.
Further, both the callers of rxrpc_send_data() call it with the lock held,
and then it returns an indication through the parameter list to say whether
it has dropped the lock or not - after which the callers both just drop the
lock if it's still held.
Fix this by:
(1) Moving the release of call->user_mutex down into rxrpc_send_data() and
get rid of the indicator parameter. This makes it easier to see where
the lock is held.
(2) After waiting, if the attempt to reacquire the mutex is interrupted,
just return directly there rather than going to out_unlock
Note that there's a slight change in behaviour in that wait_for_space
failure now doesn't check for completion because it doesn't hold the call
user_mutex. The caller, however, should re-issue the send and pick up any
error at a second attempt.
Fixes: b0f571ecd794 ("rxrpc: Fix locking in rxrpc's sendmsg")
Closes: https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260702144919.172295-1-dhowells%40redhat.com
Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
cc: Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>
cc: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
cc: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
cc: linux-afs@lists.infradead.org
cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
---
net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c b/net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c
index 4ce3ae0ba2e8..8bb327dc2833 100644
--- a/net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c
+++ b/net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c
@@ -320,8 +320,8 @@ static int rxrpc_alloc_txqueue(struct sock *sk, struct rxrpc_call *call)
static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx,
struct rxrpc_call *call,
struct msghdr *msg, size_t len,
- rxrpc_notify_end_tx_t notify_end_tx,
- bool *_dropped_lock)
+ rxrpc_notify_end_tx_t notify_end_tx)
+ __releases(&call->user_mutex)
{
struct rxrpc_txbuf *txb;
struct sock *sk = &rx->sk;
@@ -334,12 +334,12 @@ static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx,
ret = rxrpc_wait_to_be_connected(call, &timeo);
if (ret < 0)
- return ret;
+ goto out_unlock;
if (call->conn->state == RXRPC_CONN_CLIENT_UNSECURED) {
ret = rxrpc_init_client_conn_security(call->conn);
if (ret < 0)
- return ret;
+ goto out_unlock;
}
/* this should be in poll */
@@ -464,7 +464,7 @@ static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx,
if (ret == -ENOMEM)
goto maybe_error_rewind;
set_bit(RXRPC_CALL_TX_ERROR, &call->flags);
- goto out;
+ goto out_txb;
}
if (len == 0 && !more)
@@ -476,15 +476,18 @@ static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx,
success:
ret = copied;
-out:
+out_txb:
call->tx_pending = txb;
+out_unlock:
+ mutex_unlock(&call->user_mutex);
_leave(" = %d", ret);
return ret;
call_terminated:
rxrpc_put_txbuf(txb, rxrpc_txbuf_put_send_aborted);
- _leave(" = %d", call->error);
- return call->error;
+ call->tx_pending = NULL;
+ ret = call->error;
+ goto out_unlock;
maybe_error_rewind:
/* If we got a retryable error after copying all the supplied data into
@@ -507,36 +510,38 @@ static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx,
if (rxrpc_call_is_complete(call) &&
call->error < 0) {
ret = call->error;
- goto out;
+ goto out_txb;
}
goto success;
}
- goto out;
+ goto out_txb;
efault:
ret = -EFAULT;
- goto out;
+ goto out_txb;
wait_for_space:
ret = -EAGAIN;
if (msg->msg_flags & MSG_DONTWAIT)
goto maybe_error;
mutex_unlock(&call->user_mutex);
- *_dropped_lock = true;
+
ret = rxrpc_wait_for_tx_window(rx, call, &timeo,
msg->msg_flags & MSG_WAITALL);
if (ret < 0)
- goto maybe_error;
+ goto out_nolock;
if (call->interruptibility == RXRPC_INTERRUPTIBLE) {
if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&call->user_mutex) < 0) {
ret = sock_intr_errno(timeo);
- goto maybe_error;
+ goto out_nolock;
}
} else {
mutex_lock(&call->user_mutex);
}
- *_dropped_lock = false;
goto reload;
+out_nolock:
+ _leave(" = %d [intr]", ret);
+ return copied ?: ret;
}
/*
@@ -702,7 +707,6 @@ rxrpc_new_client_call_for_sendmsg(struct rxrpc_sock *rx, struct msghdr *msg,
int rxrpc_do_sendmsg(struct rxrpc_sock *rx, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
{
struct rxrpc_call *call;
- bool dropped_lock = false;
int ret;
struct rxrpc_send_params p = {
@@ -811,16 +815,15 @@ int rxrpc_do_sendmsg(struct rxrpc_sock *rx, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
ret = 0;
break;
case RXRPC_CMD_SEND_DATA:
- ret = rxrpc_send_data(rx, call, msg, len, NULL, &dropped_lock);
- break;
+ ret = rxrpc_send_data(rx, call, msg, len, NULL);
+ goto error_put;
default:
ret = -EINVAL;
break;
}
out_put_unlock:
- if (!dropped_lock)
- mutex_unlock(&call->user_mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(&call->user_mutex);
error_put:
rxrpc_put_call(call, rxrpc_call_put_sendmsg);
_leave(" = %d", ret);
@@ -857,7 +860,6 @@ int rxrpc_kernel_send_data(struct socket *sock, struct rxrpc_call *call,
struct msghdr *msg, size_t len,
rxrpc_notify_end_tx_t notify_end_tx)
{
- bool dropped_lock = false;
int ret;
_enter("{%d},", call->debug_id);
@@ -868,12 +870,10 @@ int rxrpc_kernel_send_data(struct socket *sock, struct rxrpc_call *call,
mutex_lock(&call->user_mutex);
ret = rxrpc_send_data(rxrpc_sk(sock->sk), call, msg, len,
- notify_end_tx, &dropped_lock);
+ notify_end_tx);
if (ret == -ESHUTDOWN)
ret = call->error;
- if (!dropped_lock)
- mutex_unlock(&call->user_mutex);
_leave(" = %d", ret);
return ret;
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-07 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-07 11:37 [PATCH net v9 00/14] rxrpc: Miscellaneous fixes David Howells
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 01/14] afs: Fix lack of loop around sendmsg() to rxrpc David Howells
2026-09-07 13:06 ` David Laight
2026-09-10 10:18 ` David Howells
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 02/14] afs: Fix afs to abort the rxrpc call on send error David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 03/14] rxrpc: Fix lack of loop around reply send in rxperf server David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 04/14] rxrpc: Fix sendmsg to not return an error if last packet queued David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 05/14] rxrpc: Fix sendmsg length David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 06/14] rxrpc: Fix packet encryption error handling David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` David Howells [this message]
2026-09-08 20:49 ` [PATCH net v9 07/14] rxrpc: Fix update of call->tx_pending without holding lock netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 08/14] rxrpc: Fix double IRQ enablement David Howells
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 09/14] rxrpc: Fix generation of notifications after call completion David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 10/14] rxrpc: Fix RxGK key parser to check enctype is supported David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 11/14] afs: Fix creation of RxGK CM channel token to have right size David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 12/14] afs: Fix lack of setting call->server when doing FS.InlineBulkStatus David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 13/14] rxrpc: fix use-after-free in rxrpc_poke_conn() David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
2026-09-07 11:37 ` [PATCH net v9 14/14] rxrpc: Take write lock when publishing the initial RxGK key David Howells
2026-09-08 20:49 ` netdev-bot+sashiko
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=20260907113743.1453210-8-dhowells@redhat.com \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.dionne@auristor.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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®