Hello,
On Mon, 2024-07-01 at 17:00 +0800, D. Wythe wrote:
>
>
> On 6/28/24 1:47 PM, Geliang Tang wrote:
> > From: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Every time run this BPF selftests (./test_sockmap) on a Loongarch
> > platform,
> > a Kernel panic occurs:
> >
> > '''
> > Oops[#1]:
> > CPU: 20 PID: 23245 Comm: test_sockmap Tainted: G OE 6.10.0-
> > rc2+ #32
> > Hardware name: LOONGSON Dabieshan/Loongson-TC542F0, BIOS
> > Loongson-UDK2018
> > ... ...
> > ra: 90000000043a315c tcp_bpf_sendmsg+0x23c/0x420
> > ERA: 900000000426cd1c sk_msg_memcopy_from_iter+0xbc/0x220
> > CRMD: 000000b0 (PLV0 -IE -DA +PG DACF=CC DACM=CC -WE)
> > PRMD: 0000000c (PPLV0 +PIE +PWE)
> > EUEN: 00000007 (+FPE +SXE +ASXE -BTE)
> > ECFG: 00071c1d (LIE=0,2-4,10-12 VS=7)
> > ESTAT: 00010000 [PIL] (IS= ECode=1 EsubCode=0)
> > BADV: 0000000000000040
> > PRID: 0014c011 (Loongson-64bit, Loongson-3C5000)
> > Modules linked in: tls xt_CHECKSUM xt_MASQUERADE xt_conntrack
> > ipt_REJECT
> > Process test_sockmap (pid: 23245, threadinfo=00000000aeb68043,
> > task=...)
> > Stack : ... ...
> > ...
> > Call Trace:
> > [<900000000426cd1c>] sk_msg_memcopy_from_iter+0xbc/0x220
> > [<90000000043a315c>] tcp_bpf_sendmsg+0x23c/0x420
> > [<90000000041cafc8>] __sock_sendmsg+0x68/0xe0
> > [<90000000041cc4bc>] ____sys_sendmsg+0x2bc/0x360
> > [<90000000041cea18>] ___sys_sendmsg+0xb8/0x120
> > [<90000000041cf1f8>] __sys_sendmsg+0x98/0x100
> > [<90000000045b76ec>] do_syscall+0x8c/0xc0
> > [<90000000030e1da4>] handle_syscall+0xc4/0x160
> >
> > Code: ...
> >
> > ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
> > '''
> >
> > This crash is because a NULL pointer is passed to page_address() in
> > sk_msg_memcopy_from_iter(). Due to the difference in architecture,
> > page_address(0) will not trigger a panic on the X86 platform but
> > will panic
> > on the Loogarch platform. So this bug was hidden on the x86
> > platform, but
> > now it is exposed on the Loogarch platform.
> >
> > This bug is a logic error indeed. In sk_msg_memcopy_from_iter(), an
> > invalid
> > "sge" is always used:
> >
> > if (msg->sg.copybreak >= sge->length) {
> > msg->sg.copybreak = 0;
> > sk_msg_iter_var_next(i);
> > if (i == msg->sg.end)
> > break;
> > sge = sk_msg_elem(msg, i);
> > }
> >
> > If the value of i is 2, msg->sg.end is also 2 when entering this if
> > block.
> > sk_msg_iter_var_next() increases i by 1, and now i is 3, which is
> > no longer
> > equal to msg->sg.end. The break will not be triggered, and the next
> > sge
> > obtained by sk_msg_elem(3) will be an invalid one.
> >
> > The correct approach is to check (i == msg->sg.end) first, and then
> > invoke
> > sk_msg_iter_var_next() if they are not equal.
> >
> > Fixes: 604326b41a6f ("bpf, sockmap: convert to generic sk_msg
> > interface")
> > Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > net/core/skmsg.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/core/skmsg.c b/net/core/skmsg.c
> > index 44952cdd1425..1906d0d0eeac 100644
> > --- a/net/core/skmsg.c
> > +++ b/net/core/skmsg.c
> > @@ -378,9 +378,9 @@ int sk_msg_memcopy_from_iter(struct sock *sk,
> > struct iov_iter *from,
> > /* This is possible if a trim operation shrunk the
> > buffer */
> > if (msg->sg.copybreak >= sge->length) {
> > msg->sg.copybreak = 0;
> > - sk_msg_iter_var_next(i);
> > if (i == msg->sg.end)
> > break;
> > + sk_msg_iter_var_next(i);
> Reviewed-by: D. Wythe <alibuda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for your review.
But this change breaks test_sockmap. Will send a v4 to fix this.
Changes Requested.
-Geliang
> > sge = sk_msg_elem(msg, i);
> > }
> >
>
>
>
