Commit 01bfe5e8 authored by Xin Long's avatar Xin Long Committed by David S. Miller

Revert "net/sctp: fix race condition in sctp_destroy_sock"

This reverts commit b166a20b.

This one has to be reverted as it introduced a dead lock, as
syzbot reported:

       CPU0                    CPU1
       ----                    ----
  lock(&net->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
                               lock(slock-AF_INET6);
                               lock(&net->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
  lock(slock-AF_INET6);

CPU0 is the thread of sctp_addr_wq_timeout_handler(), and CPU1
is that of sctp_close().

The original issue this commit fixed will be fixed in the next
patch.

Reported-by: syzbot+959223586843e69a2674@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: default avatarXin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
parent 2e9f6093
...@@ -1520,9 +1520,11 @@ static void sctp_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout) ...@@ -1520,9 +1520,11 @@ static void sctp_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout)
/* Supposedly, no process has access to the socket, but /* Supposedly, no process has access to the socket, but
* the net layers still may. * the net layers still may.
* Also, sctp_destroy_sock() needs to be called with addr_wq_lock
* held and that should be grabbed before socket lock.
*/ */
local_bh_disable(); spin_lock_bh(&net->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
bh_lock_sock(sk); bh_lock_sock_nested(sk);
/* Hold the sock, since sk_common_release() will put sock_put() /* Hold the sock, since sk_common_release() will put sock_put()
* and we have just a little more cleanup. * and we have just a little more cleanup.
...@@ -1531,7 +1533,7 @@ static void sctp_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout) ...@@ -1531,7 +1533,7 @@ static void sctp_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout)
sk_common_release(sk); sk_common_release(sk);
bh_unlock_sock(sk); bh_unlock_sock(sk);
local_bh_enable(); spin_unlock_bh(&net->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
sock_put(sk); sock_put(sk);
...@@ -4991,6 +4993,9 @@ static int sctp_init_sock(struct sock *sk) ...@@ -4991,6 +4993,9 @@ static int sctp_init_sock(struct sock *sk)
sk_sockets_allocated_inc(sk); sk_sockets_allocated_inc(sk);
sock_prot_inuse_add(net, sk->sk_prot, 1); sock_prot_inuse_add(net, sk->sk_prot, 1);
/* Nothing can fail after this block, otherwise
* sctp_destroy_sock() will be called without addr_wq_lock held
*/
if (net->sctp.default_auto_asconf) { if (net->sctp.default_auto_asconf) {
spin_lock(&sock_net(sk)->sctp.addr_wq_lock); spin_lock(&sock_net(sk)->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
list_add_tail(&sp->auto_asconf_list, list_add_tail(&sp->auto_asconf_list,
...@@ -5025,9 +5030,7 @@ static void sctp_destroy_sock(struct sock *sk) ...@@ -5025,9 +5030,7 @@ static void sctp_destroy_sock(struct sock *sk)
if (sp->do_auto_asconf) { if (sp->do_auto_asconf) {
sp->do_auto_asconf = 0; sp->do_auto_asconf = 0;
spin_lock_bh(&sock_net(sk)->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
list_del(&sp->auto_asconf_list); list_del(&sp->auto_asconf_list);
spin_unlock_bh(&sock_net(sk)->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
} }
sctp_endpoint_free(sp->ep); sctp_endpoint_free(sp->ep);
local_bh_disable(); local_bh_disable();
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment