From c282222a45cb9503cbfbebfdb60491f06ae84b49 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Florian Westphal Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 11:52:29 +0100 Subject: xfrm: policy: init locks early Dmitry reports following splat: INFO: trying to register non-static key. the code is fine but needs lockdep annotation. turning off the locking correctness validator. CPU: 0 PID: 13059 Comm: syz-executor1 Not tainted 4.10.0-rc7-next-20170207 #1 [..] spin_lock_bh include/linux/spinlock.h:304 [inline] xfrm_policy_flush+0x32/0x470 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:963 xfrm_policy_fini+0xbf/0x560 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:3041 xfrm_net_init+0x79f/0x9e0 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:3091 ops_init+0x10a/0x530 net/core/net_namespace.c:115 setup_net+0x2ed/0x690 net/core/net_namespace.c:291 copy_net_ns+0x26c/0x530 net/core/net_namespace.c:396 create_new_namespaces+0x409/0x860 kernel/nsproxy.c:106 unshare_nsproxy_namespaces+0xae/0x1e0 kernel/nsproxy.c:205 SYSC_unshare kernel/fork.c:2281 [inline] Problem is that when we get error during xfrm_net_init we will call xfrm_policy_fini which will acquire xfrm_policy_lock before it was initialized. Just move it around so locks get set up first. Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov Fixes: 283bc9f35bbbcb0e9 ("xfrm: Namespacify xfrm state/policy locks") Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert --- net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) (limited to 'net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c') diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c index 177e208e8ff5..3c8f5b70abf8 100644 --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c @@ -3062,6 +3062,11 @@ static int __net_init xfrm_net_init(struct net *net) { int rv; + /* Initialize the per-net locks here */ + spin_lock_init(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock); + spin_lock_init(&net->xfrm.xfrm_policy_lock); + mutex_init(&net->xfrm.xfrm_cfg_mutex); + rv = xfrm_statistics_init(net); if (rv < 0) goto out_statistics; @@ -3078,11 +3083,6 @@ static int __net_init xfrm_net_init(struct net *net) if (rv < 0) goto out; - /* Initialize the per-net locks here */ - spin_lock_init(&net->xfrm.xfrm_state_lock); - spin_lock_init(&net->xfrm.xfrm_policy_lock); - mutex_init(&net->xfrm.xfrm_cfg_mutex); - return 0; out: -- cgit v1.2.3 From 4c86d77743a54fb2d8a4d18a037a074c892bb3be Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Steffen Klassert Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 07:43:56 +0100 Subject: xfrm: Don't use sk_family for socket policy lookups On IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses sk_family is AF_INET6, but the flow informations are created based on AF_INET. So the routing set up 'struct flowi4' but we try to access 'struct flowi6' what leads to an out of bounds access. Fix this by using the family we get with the dst_entry, like we do it for the standard policy lookup. Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov Tested-by: Dmitry Vyukov Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert --- net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 9 ++++----- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) (limited to 'net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c') diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c index 3c8f5b70abf8..a9af17f0fce6 100644 --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c @@ -1248,7 +1248,7 @@ static inline int policy_to_flow_dir(int dir) } static struct xfrm_policy *xfrm_sk_policy_lookup(const struct sock *sk, int dir, - const struct flowi *fl) + const struct flowi *fl, u16 family) { struct xfrm_policy *pol; @@ -1256,8 +1256,7 @@ static struct xfrm_policy *xfrm_sk_policy_lookup(const struct sock *sk, int dir, again: pol = rcu_dereference(sk->sk_policy[dir]); if (pol != NULL) { - bool match = xfrm_selector_match(&pol->selector, fl, - sk->sk_family); + bool match = xfrm_selector_match(&pol->selector, fl, family); int err = 0; if (match) { @@ -2253,7 +2252,7 @@ struct dst_entry *xfrm_lookup(struct net *net, struct dst_entry *dst_orig, sk = sk_const_to_full_sk(sk); if (sk && sk->sk_policy[XFRM_POLICY_OUT]) { num_pols = 1; - pols[0] = xfrm_sk_policy_lookup(sk, XFRM_POLICY_OUT, fl); + pols[0] = xfrm_sk_policy_lookup(sk, XFRM_POLICY_OUT, fl, family); err = xfrm_expand_policies(fl, family, pols, &num_pols, &num_xfrms); if (err < 0) @@ -2532,7 +2531,7 @@ int __xfrm_policy_check(struct sock *sk, int dir, struct sk_buff *skb, pol = NULL; sk = sk_to_full_sk(sk); if (sk && sk->sk_policy[dir]) { - pol = xfrm_sk_policy_lookup(sk, dir, &fl); + pol = xfrm_sk_policy_lookup(sk, dir, &fl, family); if (IS_ERR(pol)) { XFRM_INC_STATS(net, LINUX_MIB_XFRMINPOLERROR); return 0; -- cgit v1.2.3