Jason Wang
2018-Mar-27 09:43 UTC
[PATCH net] vhost: correctly remove wait queue during poll failure
On 2018?03?27? 17:28, Darren Kenny wrote:> Hi Jason, > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:47:22AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> We tried to remove vq poll from wait queue, but do not check whether >> or not it was in a list before. This will lead double free. Fixing >> this by checking poll->wqh to make sure it was in a list. > > This text seems at odds with the code below, instead of checking > poll-whq, you are removing that check... > > Maybe the text needs rewording?Yes, I admit it's bad, thanks for pointing out. How about: "Fixing this by switching to use vhost_poll_stop() which zeros poll->wqh after removing poll from waitqueue to make sure it won't be freed twice." Thanks> > Thanks, > > Darren. > >> >> Reported-by: syzbot+c0272972b01b872e604a at syzkaller.appspotmail.com >> Fixes: 2b8b328b61c79 ("vhost_net: handle polling errors when setting >> backend") >> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> >> --- >> drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 3 +-- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c >> index 1b3e8d2d..5d5a9d9 100644 >> --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c >> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c >> @@ -212,8 +212,7 @@ int vhost_poll_start(struct vhost_poll *poll, >> struct file *file) >> ????if (mask) >> ??????? vhost_poll_wakeup(&poll->wait, 0, 0, poll_to_key(mask)); >> ????if (mask & EPOLLERR) { >> -??????? if (poll->wqh) >> -??????????? remove_wait_queue(poll->wqh, &poll->wait); >> +??????? vhost_poll_stop(poll); >> ??????? ret = -EINVAL; >> ????} >> >> -- >> 2.7.4 >>
Michael S. Tsirkin
2018-Mar-27 13:58 UTC
[PATCH net] vhost: correctly remove wait queue during poll failure
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 05:43:14PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:> > > On 2018?03?27? 17:28, Darren Kenny wrote: > > Hi Jason, > > > > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 11:47:22AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > We tried to remove vq poll from wait queue, but do not check whether > > > or not it was in a list before. This will lead double free. Fixing > > > this by checking poll->wqh to make sure it was in a list. > > > > This text seems at odds with the code below, instead of checking > > poll-whq, you are removing that check... > > > > Maybe the text needs rewording? > > Yes, I admit it's bad, thanks for pointing out. > > How about: > > "Fixing this by switching to use vhost_poll_stop() which zeros poll->wqh > after removing poll from waitqueue to make sure it won't be freed twice." > > ThanksLet's be a bit more specific about the problem maybe? when vhost's attempt to start polling a descriptor fails, we remove the poll->wqh entry from wait queue but do not clear it, so the following cleanup (e.g. on release) will attempt to remove it again. To fix, switch to vhost_poll_stop() which zeros poll->wqh after removing poll from waitqueue to make sure it won't be freed twice." the patch itself is fine though: Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>> > > > Thanks, > > > > Darren. > > > > > > > > Reported-by: syzbot+c0272972b01b872e604a at syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > > Fixes: 2b8b328b61c79 ("vhost_net: handle polling errors when setting > > > backend") > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang at redhat.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 3 +-- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c > > > index 1b3e8d2d..5d5a9d9 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c > > > +++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c > > > @@ -212,8 +212,7 @@ int vhost_poll_start(struct vhost_poll *poll, > > > struct file *file) > > > ????if (mask) > > > ??????? vhost_poll_wakeup(&poll->wait, 0, 0, poll_to_key(mask)); > > > ????if (mask & EPOLLERR) { > > > -??????? if (poll->wqh) > > > -??????????? remove_wait_queue(poll->wqh, &poll->wait); > > > +??????? vhost_poll_stop(poll); > > > ??????? ret = -EINVAL; > > > ????} > > > > > > -- > > > 2.7.4 > > >