From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5331E4A2609 for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 15:14:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789398863; cv=none; b=bPlC+LaC6Ek/uTT6vDkNNjF5ovoPI+yXRAfgXeHLgWgnJyv0lVN2vZN3Y3/4fdy2mFvjf9f60Ec7mCsoW7yl1KDnj94yIAwu6pwBbhU3DvOdQaXFyTHwd9OkD/Vc2KD320ar+DAAQj4Du5sdw5FteOdKj67N4qSOHVi3iZGrkok= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789398863; c=relaxed/simple; bh=MSYZLvdSF53s2gnH1MwLihMDsZmX1XHocL1mZCeHnb0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=eV5xfV4K+3N8XFNTMfByRKlvRpZMrqu4md+FrSZ37DNWdr9rl/vE4i16lhmghZkfiCDseF5M7LiJ8JqclOV+zDE1hRGi5VmLGZiy/Ki/HdjGZ6w1GrZZspkn+WbpTPGH50Ejpp20u2C6Q1mZMyWhYebZhevdNmT7Z3C0xNwqM30= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=fIQ/fRkz; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="fIQ/fRkz" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1789398860; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=TbhDlTCGOaV2Ga00p5gBetKJa/ySX4o9J5SlE1M7twI=; b=fIQ/fRkzjQwuFmVp1xbQY5Nm2Jaq3L5M7EEE0iJN4cAK+ncIuIzL4pyGonjcsWNUv4NA7I HMhMnvX77xJtU+6ZLmlwBdydQCu77BR/oZUBWHaYVKoRy49lGdLIwwlGQ601yMR2F6Tjf5 UrLkO1D1JUICELOU5lxZFZjNkbOvMe0= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-57-TVIb0RX8Pvewe_xL6Z2UIg-1; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 11:14:17 -0400 X-MC-Unique: TVIb0RX8Pvewe_xL6Z2UIg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: TVIb0RX8Pvewe_xL6Z2UIg_1789398855 Received: from mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D23F182A101; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 15:14:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.com (unknown [10.44.32.54]) by mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82C793003EF9; Mon, 14 Sep 2026 15:14:11 +0000 (UTC) From: David Howells To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: David Howells , Marc Dionne , Jakub Kicinski , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH net v10 05/14] rxrpc: Fix update of call->tx_pending without holding lock Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 16:13:29 +0100 Message-ID: <20260914151340.3227501-6-dhowells@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20260914151340.3227501-1-dhowells@redhat.com> References: <20260914151340.3227501-1-dhowells@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.4 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 (3) Restricting the txb variable to inside the buffering loop and leaving ->tx_pending set until we've queued the buffer. 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 cc: Marc Dionne cc: Eric Dumazet cc: "David S. Miller" cc: Jakub Kicinski cc: Paolo Abeni cc: Simon Horman cc: linux-afs@lists.infradead.org cc: stable@vger.kernel.org --- net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c b/net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c index bbb39835ef9e..b370e440e2fd 100644 --- a/net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c +++ b/net/rxrpc/sendmsg.c @@ -320,10 +320,9 @@ 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; enum rxrpc_call_state state; long timeo; @@ -341,23 +340,18 @@ 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 */ sk_clear_bit(SOCKWQ_ASYNC_NOSPACE, sk); reload: - txb = call->tx_pending; - call->tx_pending = NULL; - if (txb) - rxrpc_see_txbuf(txb, rxrpc_txbuf_see_send_more); - ret = -EPIPE; if (sk->sk_shutdown & SEND_SHUTDOWN) goto maybe_error; @@ -386,6 +380,8 @@ static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx, } do { + struct rxrpc_txbuf *txb = call->tx_pending; + if (!txb) { size_t remain; @@ -411,6 +407,9 @@ static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx, ret = -ENOMEM; goto maybe_error; } + call->tx_pending = txb; + } else { + rxrpc_see_txbuf(txb, rxrpc_txbuf_see_send_more); } _debug("append"); @@ -446,9 +445,9 @@ static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx, ret = call->security->secure_packet(call, txb); if (ret < 0) - goto out; + goto out_unlock; rxrpc_queue_packet(rx, call, txb, notify_end_tx); - txb = NULL; + call->tx_pending = NULL; } } while (len > 0 && msg_data_left(msg) > 0); @@ -457,45 +456,46 @@ static int rxrpc_send_data(struct rxrpc_sock *rx, if (rxrpc_call_is_complete(call) && call->error < 0) ret = call->error; -out: - 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; + ret = call->error; + goto out_unlock; maybe_error: if (copied) goto success; - goto out; + goto out_unlock; efault: ret = -EFAULT; - goto out; + goto out_unlock; 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; } /* @@ -661,7 +661,6 @@ 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 = { @@ -770,16 +769,15 @@ 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); @@ -807,7 +805,6 @@ int rxrpc_do_sendmsg(struct rxrpc_sock *rx, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len) int rxrpc_kernel_send_data(struct socket *sock, struct rxrpc_call *call, struct msghdr *msg, rxrpc_notify_end_tx_t notify_end_tx) { - bool dropped_lock = false; int ret; _enter("{%d},", call->debug_id); @@ -819,13 +816,9 @@ 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, - msg_data_left(msg), - notify_end_tx, &dropped_lock); + msg_data_left(msg), notify_end_tx); if (ret == -ESHUTDOWN) ret = call->error; - - if (!dropped_lock) - mutex_unlock(&call->user_mutex); if (ret < 0) break; if (msg_data_left(msg) == 0) {