[PATCH] net: xfrm: fix a race condition during allocing spi

From: zhuoliang zhang <redacted>

we found that the following race condition exists in
xfrm_alloc_userspi flow:

user thread                                    state_hash_work thread
----                                           ----
xfrm_alloc_userspi()
 __find_acq_core()
   /*alloc new xfrm_state:x*/
   xfrm_state_alloc()
   /*schedule state_hash_work thread*/
   xfrm_hash_grow_check()   	               xfrm_hash_resize()
 xfrm_alloc_spi                                  /*hold lock*/
      x->id.spi = htonl(spi)                     spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)
      /*waiting lock release*/                     xfrm_hash_transfer()
      spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)      /*add x into hlist:net->xfrm.state_byspi*/
	                                                hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi)
                                                 spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)

    /*add x into hlist:net->xfrm.state_byspi 2 times*/
    hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi)

So the same xfrm_stame (x) is added into the same list_hash
(net->xfrm.state_byspi)2 times that makes the list_hash become
a inifite loop.

To fix the race,x->id.spi = htonl(spi) in the xfrm_alloc_spi() 
is moved to the back of spin_lock_bh,sothat state_hash_work thread 
no longer add x which id.spi is zero into the hash_list.

Signed-off-by: zhuoliang zhang <redacted>
---
 net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c | 8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
index bbd4643d7e82..a77da7aae6fe 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c

@@ -2004,6 +2004,7 @@ int xfrm_alloc_spi(struct xfrm_state *x, u32 low, u32 high)
 	int err = -ENOENT;
 	__be32 minspi = htonl(low);
 	__be32 maxspi = htonl(high);
+	__be32 newspi = 0;
 	u32 mark = x->mark.v & x->mark.m;
 
 	spin_lock_bh(&x->lock);

@@ -2022,21 +2023,22 @@ int xfrm_alloc_spi(struct xfrm_state *x, u32 low, u32 high)
 			xfrm_state_put(x0);
 			goto unlock;
 		}
-		x->id.spi = minspi;
+		newspi = minspi;
 	} else {
 		u32 spi = 0;
 		for (h = 0; h < high-low+1; h++) {
 			spi = low + prandom_u32()%(high-low+1);
 			x0 = xfrm_state_lookup(net, mark, &x->id.daddr, htonl(spi), x->id.proto, x->props.family);
 			if (x0 == NULL) {
-				x->id.spi = htonl(spi);
+				newspi = htonl(spi);
 				break;
 			}
 			xfrm_state_put(x0);
 		}
 	}
-	if (x->id.spi) {
+	if (newspi) {
 		spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock);
+		x->id.spi = newspi;
 		h = xfrm_spi_hash(net, &x->id.daddr, x->id.spi, x->id.proto, x->props.family);
 		hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi, net->xfrm.state_byspi + h);
 		spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock);

-- 
2.18.0
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 04:18:00PM +0800, Zhuoliang Zhang wrote:

From: zhuoliang zhang <redacted>

we found that the following race condition exists in
xfrm_alloc_userspi flow:

user thread                                    state_hash_work thread
----                                           ----
xfrm_alloc_userspi()
 __find_acq_core()
   /*alloc new xfrm_state:x*/
   xfrm_state_alloc()
   /*schedule state_hash_work thread*/
   xfrm_hash_grow_check()   	               xfrm_hash_resize()
 xfrm_alloc_spi                                  /*hold lock*/
      x->id.spi = htonl(spi)                     spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)
      /*waiting lock release*/                     xfrm_hash_transfer()
      spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)      /*add x into hlist:net->xfrm.state_byspi*/
	                                                hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi)
                                                 spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)

    /*add x into hlist:net->xfrm.state_byspi 2 times*/
    hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi)

So the same xfrm_stame (x) is added into the same list_hash
(net->xfrm.state_byspi)2 times that makes the list_hash become
a inifite loop.

Your explanation makes no sense.  Prior to obtaining the spin lock
on the LHS, the state x hasn't been added to thte table yet.  So
how can the RHS be transferring it?

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu [off-list ref]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

hi maintainer:

there are 2 related hash lists : net->xfrm.state_bydst and
net->xfrm.state_byspi:

1. a new state x is alloced in xfrm_state_alloc() and added into the
bydst hlist in  __find_acq_core() on the LHS;
2. on the RHS, state_hash_work thread travels the old bydst and tranfers
every xfrm_state (include x) to the new bydst hlist and new byspi hlist;
3. user thread on the LHS gets the lock and adds x to the new byspi
hlist again.

thanks




On Wed, 2020-10-21 at 18:12 +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:

On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 04:18:00PM +0800, Zhuoliang Zhang wrote:

quoted

From: zhuoliang zhang <redacted>

we found that the following race condition exists in
xfrm_alloc_userspi flow:

user thread                                    state_hash_work thread
----                                           ----
xfrm_alloc_userspi()
 __find_acq_core()
   /*alloc new xfrm_state:x*/
   xfrm_state_alloc()
   /*schedule state_hash_work thread*/
   xfrm_hash_grow_check()   	               xfrm_hash_resize()
 xfrm_alloc_spi                                  /*hold lock*/
      x->id.spi = htonl(spi)                     spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)
      /*waiting lock release*/                     xfrm_hash_transfer()
      spin_lock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)      /*add x into hlist:net->xfrm.state_byspi*/
	                                                hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi)
                                                 spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock)

    /*add x into hlist:net->xfrm.state_byspi 2 times*/
    hlist_add_head_rcu(&x->byspi)

So the same xfrm_stame (x) is added into the same list_hash
(net->xfrm.state_byspi)2 times that makes the list_hash become
a inifite loop.

Your explanation makes no sense.  Prior to obtaining the spin lock
on the LHS, the state x hasn't been added to thte table yet.  So
how can the RHS be transferring it?

Cheers,

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 01:53:15PM +0800, zhuoliang.zhang wrote:

there are 2 related hash lists : net->xfrm.state_bydst and
net->xfrm.state_byspi:

1. a new state x is alloced in xfrm_state_alloc() and added into the
bydst hlist in  __find_acq_core() on the LHS;
2. on the RHS, state_hash_work thread travels the old bydst and tranfers
every xfrm_state (include x) to the new bydst hlist and new byspi hlist;
3. user thread on the LHS gets the lock and adds x to the new byspi
hlist again.

Good catch.  Please add a Fixes header.  I think this was introduced
with the dynamic resizing in f034b5d4efdfe0fb9e2a1ce1d95fa7914f24de49.

Thanks,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu [off-list ref]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel