Re: [PATCH] skbuff: skb_segment, Update nfrags after calling zero copy functions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 11:31 AM Mohamed Khalfella
<mkhalfella@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2023-08-29 10:07:59 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 8:50 AM Mohamed Khalfella
> > <mkhalfella@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2023-08-28 21:18:16 -0700, willemjdebruijn wrote:
> > > > Small point: nfrags is not the only state that needs to be refreshed
> > > > after a fags realloc, also frag.
> > >
> > > I am new to this code. Can you help me understand why frag needs to be
> > > updated too? My reading of this code is that frag points to frags array
> > > in shared info. As long as shared info pointer remain the same frag
> > > pointer should remain valid.
> > >
> >
> > skb_copy_ubufs() could actually call skb_unclone() and thus skb->head
> > could be re-allocated.
> >
> > I guess that if you run your patch (and a repro of the bug ?) with
> > KASAN enabled kernel, you should see a possible use-after-free ?
> >
> > To force the skb_unclone() path, having a tcpdump catching all packets
> > would be enough I think.
> >
>
> Okay, I see it now. I have not tested this patch with tcpdump capturing
> packets at the same time. Also, during my testing I have not seen the
> value of skb->head changnig. Now you are mentioning it it, I will make
> sure to test with tcpdump running and see skb->head changing. Thank you
> for pointing that out.
>
> For frag, I guess something like frag = &skb_shinfo(list_skb)->frags[i];
> should do the job. I have not tested it though. I will need to do more
> testing before posting updated patch.

Another way to test this path for certain (without tcpdump having to race)
is to add a temporary/debug patch like this one:

diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
index a298992060e6efdecb87c7ffc8290eafe330583f..20cc42be5e81cdca567515f2a886af4ada0fbe0a
100644
--- a/net/core/skbuff.c
+++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
@@ -1749,7 +1749,8 @@ int skb_copy_ubufs(struct sk_buff *skb, gfp_t gfp_mask)
        int i, order, psize, new_frags;
        u32 d_off;

-       if (skb_shared(skb) || skb_unclone(skb, gfp_mask))
+       if (skb_shared(skb) ||
+           pskb_expand_head(skb, 0, 0, gfp_mask))
                return -EINVAL;

        if (!num_frags)

Note that this might catch other bugs :/





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux