On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 02:22:20PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 01:17:17PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote: > > The sock counting (sock_update_netprioidx() and sock_update_classid()) was > > missing from pidfd's implementation of received fd installation. Replace > > the open-coded version with a call to the new receive_fd() > > helper. > > > > Thanks to Vamshi K Sthambamkadi <vamshi.k.sthambamkadi@xxxxxxxxx> for > > catching a missed fput() in an earlier version of this patch. > > > > Fixes: 8649c322f75c ("pid: Implement pidfd_getfd syscall") > > Reviewed-by: Sargun Dhillon <sargun@xxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Thanks! > Acked-by: Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Christoph, Kees, > > So while the patch is correct it leaves 5.6 and 5.7 with a bug in the > pidfd_getfd() implementation and that just doesn't seem right. I'm > wondering whether we should introduce: > > void sock_update(struct file *file) > { > struct socket *sock; > int error; > > sock = sock_from_file(file, &error); > if (sock) { > sock_update_netprioidx(&sock->sk->sk_cgrp_data); > sock_update_classid(&sock->sk->sk_cgrp_data); > } > } > > and switch pidfd_getfd() over to: > > diff --git a/kernel/pid.c b/kernel/pid.c > index f1496b757162..c26bba822be3 100644 > --- a/kernel/pid.c > +++ b/kernel/pid.c > @@ -642,10 +642,12 @@ static int pidfd_getfd(struct pid *pid, int fd) > } > > ret = get_unused_fd_flags(O_CLOEXEC); > - if (ret < 0) > + if (ret < 0) { > fput(file); > - else > + } else { > + sock_update(file); > fd_install(ret, file); > + } > > return ret; > } > > first thing in the series and then all of the other patches on top of it > so that we can Cc stable for this and that can get it backported to 5.6, > 5.7, and 5.8. > > Alternatively, I can make this a separate bugfix patch series which I'll > send upstream soonish. Or we have specific patches just for 5.6, 5.7, > and 5.8. Thoughts? I was thinking of just tossing the entire series (hch's and mine) at -stable since it's relatively narrow. I'll look at what's needed for backports... > > Thanks! > Christian -- Kees Cook