Re: [PATCH v2] sctp: Fix list corruption resulting from freeing an association on a list

[David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

From: Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 15:13:51 -0400

> A few days ago Dave Jones reported this oops:
 ...
> It appears from his analysis and some staring at the code that this is likely
> occuring because an association is getting freed while still on the
> sctp_assoc_hashtable.  As a result, we get a gpf when traversing the hashtable
> while a freed node corrupts part of the list.
> 
> Nominally I would think that an mibalanced refcount was responsible for this,
> but I can't seem to find any obvious imbalance.  What I did note however was
> that the two places where we create an association using
> sctp_primitive_ASSOCIATE (__sctp_connect and sctp_sendmsg), have failure paths
> which free a newly created association after calling sctp_primitive_ASSOCIATE.
> sctp_primitive_ASSOCIATE brings us into the sctp_sf_do_prm_asoc path, which
> issues a SCTP_CMD_NEW_ASOC side effect, which in turn adds a new association to
> the aforementioned hash table.  the sctp command interpreter that process side
> effects has not way to unwind previously processed commands, so freeing the
> association from the __sctp_connect or sctp_sendmsg error path would lead to a
> freed association remaining on this hash table.
> 
> I've fixed this but modifying sctp_[un]hash_established to use hlist_del_init,
> which allows us to proerly use hlist_unhashed to check if the node is on a
> hashlist safely during a delete.  That in turn alows us to safely call
> sctp_unhash_established in the __sctp_connect and sctp_sendmsg error paths
> before freeing them, regardles of what the associations state is on the hash
> list.
> 
> I noted, while I was doing this, that the __sctp_unhash_endpoint was using
> hlist_unhsashed in a simmilar fashion, but never nullified any removed nodes
> pointers to make that function work properly, so I fixed that up in a simmilar
> fashion.
> 
> I attempted to test this using a virtual guest running the SCTP_RR test from
> netperf in a loop while running the trinity fuzzer, both in a loop.  I wasn't
> able to recreate the problem prior to this fix, nor was I able to trigger the
> failure after (neither of which I suppose is suprising).  Given the trace above
> however, I think its likely that this is what we hit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reported-by: davej@xxxxxxxxxx

Looks great, applied and queued up for -stable, thanks Neil.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html