This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled net: add missing data-race annotations around sk->sk_peek_off to the 4.14-stable tree which can be found at: http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary The filename of the patch is: net-add-missing-data-race-annotations-around-sk-sk_p.patch and it can be found in the queue-4.14 subdirectory. If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree, please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it. commit 733c8ebc4b10bb570decb14b12e3cc323582aa1e Author: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri Jul 28 15:03:16 2023 +0000 net: add missing data-race annotations around sk->sk_peek_off [ Upstream commit 11695c6e966b0ec7ed1d16777d294cef865a5c91 ] sk_getsockopt() runs locklessly, thus we need to annotate the read of sk->sk_peek_off. While we are at it, add corresponding annotations to sk_set_peek_off() and unix_set_peek_off(). Fixes: b9bb53f3836f ("sock: convert sk_peek_offset functions to WRITE_ONCE") Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx> Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c index 5991b09c75f4d..d938b7f2bac32 100644 --- a/net/core/sock.c +++ b/net/core/sock.c @@ -1329,7 +1329,7 @@ int sock_getsockopt(struct socket *sock, int level, int optname, if (!sock->ops->set_peek_off) return -EOPNOTSUPP; - v.val = sk->sk_peek_off; + v.val = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_peek_off); break; case SO_NOFCS: v.val = sock_flag(sk, SOCK_NOFCS); @@ -2480,7 +2480,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__sk_mem_reclaim); int sk_set_peek_off(struct sock *sk, int val) { - sk->sk_peek_off = val; + WRITE_ONCE(sk->sk_peek_off, val); return 0; } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sk_set_peek_off); diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c index 375d4e20efd6b..c4ec2c2e4c861 100644 --- a/net/unix/af_unix.c +++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c @@ -701,7 +701,7 @@ static int unix_set_peek_off(struct sock *sk, int val) if (mutex_lock_interruptible(&u->iolock)) return -EINTR; - sk->sk_peek_off = val; + WRITE_ONCE(sk->sk_peek_off, val); mutex_unlock(&u->iolock); return 0;