On 5/16/25 7:17 AM, Jiayuan Chen wrote:
The sk->sk_socket is not locked or referenced in backlog thread, and
during the call to skb_send_sock(), there is a race condition with
the release of sk_socket. All types of sockets(tcp/udp/unix/vsock)
will be affected.
Race conditions:
'''
CPU0 CPU1
backlog::skb_send_sock
sendmsg_unlocked
sock_sendmsg
sock_sendmsg_nosec
close(fd):
...
ops->release() -> sock_map_close()
sk_socket->ops = NULL
free(socket)
sock->ops->sendmsg
^
panic here
'''
The ref of psock become 0 after sock_map_close() executed.
'''
void sock_map_close()
{
...
if (likely(psock)) {
...
// !! here we remove psock and the ref of psock become 0
sock_map_remove_links(sk, psock)
psock = sk_psock_get(sk);
if (unlikely(!psock))
goto no_psock; <=== Control jumps here via goto
...
cancel_delayed_work_sync(&psock->work); <=== not executed
sk_psock_put(sk, psock);
...
}
'''
Based on the fact that we already wait for the workqueue to finish in
sock_map_close() if psock is held, we simply increase the psock
reference count to avoid race conditions.
With this patch, if the backlog thread is running, sock_map_close() will
wait for the backlog thread to complete and cancel all pending work.
If no backlog running, any pending work that hasn't started by then will
fail when invoked by sk_psock_get(), as the psock reference count have
been zeroed, and sk_psock_drop() will cancel all jobs via
cancel_delayed_work_sync().
In summary, we require synchronization to coordinate the backlog thread
and close() thread.
The panic I catched:
'''
Workqueue: events sk_psock_backlog
RIP: 0010:sock_sendmsg+0x21d/0x440
RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffffc9000521fad8 RCX: 0000000000000001
...
Call Trace:
<TASK>
? die_addr+0x40/0xa0
? exc_general_protection+0x14c/0x230
? asm_exc_general_protection+0x26/0x30
? sock_sendmsg+0x21d/0x440
? sock_sendmsg+0x3e0/0x440
? __pfx_sock_sendmsg+0x10/0x10
__skb_send_sock+0x543/0xb70
sk_psock_backlog+0x247/0xb80
...
'''
Reported-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@xxxxxxx>
Fixes: 4b4647add7d3 ("sock_map: avoid race between sock_map_close and sk_psock_put")
Signed-off-by: Jiayuan Chen <jiayuan.chen@xxxxxxxxx>
---
V5 -> V6: Use correct "Fixes" tag.
V4 -> V5:
This patch is extracted from my previous v4 patchset that contained
multiple fixes, and it remains unchanged. Since this fix is relatively
simple and easy to review, we want to separate it from other fixes to
avoid any potential interference.
---
net/core/skmsg.c | 8 ++++++++
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/core/skmsg.c b/net/core/skmsg.c
index 276934673066..34c51eb1a14f 100644
--- a/net/core/skmsg.c
+++ b/net/core/skmsg.c
@@ -656,6 +656,13 @@ static void sk_psock_backlog(struct work_struct *work)
bool ingress;
int ret;
+ /* Increment the psock refcnt to synchronize with close(fd) path in
+ * sock_map_close(), ensuring we wait for backlog thread completion
+ * before sk_socket freed. If refcnt increment fails, it indicates
+ * sock_map_close() completed with sk_socket potentially already freed.
+ */
+ if (!sk_psock_get(psock->sk))
This seems to be the first use case to pass "psock->sk" to "sk_psock_get()".
I could have missed the sock_map details here. Considering it is racing with
sock_map_close() which should also do a sock_put(sk) [?],
could you help to explain what makes it safe to access the psock->sk here?
+ return;
mutex_lock(&psock->work_mutex);
while ((skb = skb_peek(&psock->ingress_skb))) {
len = skb->len;
@@ -708,6 +715,7 @@ static void sk_psock_backlog(struct work_struct *work)
}
end:
mutex_unlock(&psock->work_mutex);
+ sk_psock_put(psock->sk, psock);
}
struct sk_psock *sk_psock_init(struct sock *sk, int node)
