-
Paolo Abeni authored
The Syzbot reported a possible deadlock in the netfilter area caused by rtnl lock, xt lock and socket lock being acquired with a different order on different code paths, leading to the following backtrace: Reviewed-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com> ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 4.15.0+ #301 Not tainted ------------------------------------------------------ syzkaller233489/4179 is trying to acquire lock: (rtnl_mutex){+.+.}, at: [<0000000048e996fd>] rtnl_lock+0x17/0x20 net/core/rtnetlink.c:74 but task is already holding lock: (&xt[i].mutex){+.+.}, at: [<00000000328553a2>] xt_find_table_lock+0x3e/0x3e0 net/netfilter/x_tables.c:1041 which lock already depends on the new lock. === Since commit 3f34cfae1230 ("netfilter: on sockopt() acquire sock lock only in the required scope"), we already acquire the socket lock in the innermost scope, where needed. In such commit I forgot to remove the outer-most socket lock from the getsockopt() path, this commit addresses the issues dropping it now. v1 -> v2: fix bad subj, added relavant 'fixes' tag Fixes: 22265a5c ("netfilter: xt_TEE: resolve oif using netdevice notifiers") Fixes: 202f59af ("netfilter: ipt_CLUSTERIP: do not hold dev") Fixes: 3f34cfae1230 ("netfilter: on sockopt() acquire sock lock only in the required scope") Reported-by: syzbot+ddde1c7b7ff7442d7f2d@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Suggested-by: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
01ea306f