Commits
Herton R. Krzesinski committed 593cbb3ec6a
net/rds: fix possible double free on sock tear down I got a report of a double free happening at RDS slab cache. One suspicion was that may be somewhere we were doing a sock_hold/sock_put on an already freed sock. Thus after providing a kernel with the following change: static inline void sock_hold(struct sock *sk) { - atomic_inc(&sk->sk_refcnt); + if (!atomic_inc_not_zero(&sk->sk_refcnt)) + WARN(1, "Trying to hold sock already gone: %p (family: %hd)\n", + sk, sk->sk_family); } The warning successfuly triggered: Trying to hold sock already gone: ffff81f6dda61280 (family: 21) WARNING: at include/net/sock.h:350 sock_hold() Call Trace: <IRQ> [<ffffffff8adac135>] :rds:rds_send_remove_from_sock+0xf0/0x21b [<ffffffff8adad35c>] :rds:rds_send_drop_acked+0xbf/0xcf [<ffffffff8addf546>] :rds_rdma:rds_ib_recv_tasklet_fn+0x256/0x2dc [<ffffffff8009899a>] tasklet_action+0x8f/0x12b [<ffffffff800125a2>] __do_softirq+0x89/0x133 [<ffffffff8005f30c>] call_softirq+0x1c/0x28 [<ffffffff8006e644>] do_softirq+0x2c/0x7d [<ffffffff8006e4d4>] do_IRQ+0xee/0xf7 [<ffffffff8005e625>] ret_from_intr+0x0/0xa <EOI> Looking at the call chain above, the only way I think this would be possible is if somewhere we already released the same socket->sock which is assigned to the rds_message at rds_send_remove_from_sock. Which seems only possible to happen after the tear down done on rds_release. rds_release properly calls rds_send_drop_to to drop the socket from any rds_message, and some proper synchronization is in place to avoid race with rds_send_drop_acked/rds_send_remove_from_sock. However, I still see a very narrow window where it may be possible we touch a sock already released: when rds_release races with rds_send_drop_acked, we check RDS_MSG_ON_CONN to avoid cleanup on the same rds_message, but in this specific case we don't clear rm->m_rs. In this case, it seems we could then go on at rds_send_drop_to and after it returns, the sock is freed by last sock_put on rds_release, with concurrently we being at rds_send_remove_from_sock; then at some point in the loop at rds_send_remove_from_sock we process an rds_message which didn't have rm->m_rs unset for a freed sock, and a possible sock_hold on an sock already gone at rds_release happens. This hopefully address the described condition above and avoids a double free on "second last" sock_put. In addition, I removed the comment about socket destruction on top of rds_send_drop_acked: we call rds_send_drop_to in rds_release and we should have things properly serialized there, thus I can't see the comment being accurate there. Signed-off-by: Herton R. Krzesinski <herton@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>