Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp4161135pxj; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:08:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyt5Le2eRbgfffQlIGustZoHL37aztIwj/ETw3caUkVEiAEnf8dC/pd/870jkhhDMCndyba X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:9a4f:: with SMTP id aj15mr2101299ejc.197.1623802122537; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:08:42 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1623802122; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=uI868/wWEJslkfij6pSdYaQF+KlmT5gNi0O2vZFWZFttBGmZzp4ulp6TWZYbVPya8c k48idoyaYRWousub/IvB65mCAoWNegY92DnXwgpOL5iTOdu5uB2gRjby4IbUpQDEXyGI ABaOJyVkdoT6QcjCf6JzbYJW1BVDXHQz7mzTlYJjO9NSxPoZVxsUBjKaDZXQcmkrEFAc Aaqg52poUREie3bY5HLHYGAIDZLWvd9b8RcanMbJHMgJodE2n0kSDeZQ4gV0dk4wX11r pK1nVxCv+8Vsng6dhbwF6g0SXt+y//e9zZjvYblVG6nxgY9FaxJPCvKFka3ntNMHnN7d FY4g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=RQexx5LVkdV318CpG6zh5NCoav3ETAxxXPd9ZBLUp9Q=; b=VOE2QuBoBOurXMvJGH2fxrFQPdaKeZmMuQGG68w7kI6m///86NMC7fPwzoDZCHtjCS Y27uTYaLxBKJpSHs9WFmkdxLQ/NhgUQSB7H2EmS1/rSgHRN/vBmmY3Bc/yEWfKmEUKi+ zAITmnrNeyt9Ml4MyAK7HU4LIlK7NZ8t/FcshAujcsLAvD/PA8l6+1Lwh++v+NZda7V9 ruuPoqdDw0mtcO/89wIVHN3tNsf4qoY52LPJhbuvqPl+j1oy2aK3bbkLnPUtWqV2SYR6 ye5zSmbXCgd2EvUEBuk/xXu75MWfSZnfjHwXP9kPy+Et8dU6cDWrD8SLEuL3ikBX7Y/M rXbg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=jUVMyv2P; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a26si329451edt.163.2021.06.15.17.08.14; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:08:42 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20161025 header.b=jUVMyv2P; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231604AbhFPAIx (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 15 Jun 2021 20:08:53 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57070 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229898AbhFPAIw (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Jun 2021 20:08:52 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb29.google.com (mail-yb1-xb29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFBDAC06175F for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:06:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb29.google.com with SMTP id c14so393266ybk.3 for ; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:06:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RQexx5LVkdV318CpG6zh5NCoav3ETAxxXPd9ZBLUp9Q=; b=jUVMyv2PJWfPrfyK60UVEzoaE2yU5B2+8MltwiJB5ociJHywWyDQ7Y/Q6+OonN+jQu IzizuRLlGXJ1mMCiir7m566oGGUhRmWxomJ78Gu13gAhDxIRVBXyDQINqAFIj/1PMEtC maDuFrfNgKLO+G9KOHHIbXzv4A5XVCgHogDgSP7aRO1yVI9+HUN7/sfQG5FXwgJOPAh1 fkqsIlpmx8IhIrZjF9bhDy5n+MmgNmAnhPJ8ijJHQZBnKr2evRUwQ903a0Cphn0aYWnb ntXuUWJlmNbZPry2m9lxbgMtYe1wOk9lfkjzRzYBJbVVutTwLmtzYp5XBGtNPUmmhoOz QkSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RQexx5LVkdV318CpG6zh5NCoav3ETAxxXPd9ZBLUp9Q=; b=I9Sl2aDOvR/bGvFPjc2IaMkwPtWYQ71V20s8K2ybfYvBMVYIinDZoJcWPYYDtbqPWI eCPM3ql920nZ41Q2QO50GWYkv9OEh97/FVCMzFjZegARk9trCdnlUeVu5Hl0aa7FI+t/ AFJfDr2GJV2QkSoOWAEgC2urlws64ISyF5IDet4sXrDc4hocD5m0tn8ZxJzvk9fr+h8c cJTdxZuvocGiqHte5IYwdMYwqohJyC2N4NG9izb4FDrHsull9qVELv0bxYTo8TALQ5s1 7JUrKXye6ej6hr/uVfibWZXJXiGfeKjoVROFIa0v+zdlXz6EeRJxZpBmtpHfw4zgLyn6 v7UQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533iqEwAoMmWtYTgPkgNjmdQtjoggjhPjmF/g1SrF8JmdZMwpp7l 04iqsukP9cLse/7v6SJasGCUYyfRyPtjLgyRUBfwtw== X-Received: by 2002:a25:be44:: with SMTP id d4mr2378362ybm.497.1623802004787; Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:06:44 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210604015238.2422145-1-zenczykowski@gmail.com> <20210604015238.2422145-2-zenczykowski@gmail.com> <80bb7f49-4b69-169a-a540-f2a46551ef7c@iogearbox.net> In-Reply-To: <80bb7f49-4b69-169a-a540-f2a46551ef7c@iogearbox.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=C5=BBenczykowski?= Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 17:06:32 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] bpf: do not change gso_size during bpf_skb_change_proto() To: Daniel Borkmann Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Linux Network Development Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , BPF Mailing List , "David S . Miller" , Dongseok Yi , Willem de Bruijn , yhs@fb.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, Jakub Kicinski , songliubraving@fb.com, John Fastabend , Martin Lau Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >> (a) I've long had a bug assigned to myself to debug a super rare kernel > >> crash on Android Pixel phones which can (per stacktrace) be traced back > >> to bpf clat ipv6 to ipv4 protocol conversion causing some sort of ugly > >> failure much later on during transmit deep in the GSO engine, AFAICT > >> precisely because of this change to gso_size, though I've never been able > >> to manually reproduce it. > >> I believe it may be related to the particular network offload support > >> of attached usb ethernet dongle being used for tethering off of an > >> IPv6-only cellular connection. The reason might be we end up with more > >> segments than max permitted, or with a gso packet with only one segment... > >> (either way we break some assumption and hit a BUG_ON) > > Do you happen to have some more debug data from there, e.g. which bug_on > is hit? Do you have some pointers to the driver code where you suspect > this could cause an issue? Yes, I found an old relevant stack trace in google bug 158835517. This is from a blueline (Pixel 3 non-XL) running a 4.9.223 derived kernel. [57742.623372] c0 0 ------------[ cut here ]------------ [57742.623451] c0 0 kernel BUG at net/core/skbuff.c:3290! [57742.623473] c0 0 Internal error: Oops - BUG: 0 [#1] PREEMPT SMP [57742.623500] Modules linked in: ftm5 heatmap videobuf2_vmalloc videobuf2_memops snd_soc_sdm845 snd_soc_cs35l36 snd_soc_wcd_spi snd_soc_wcd934x snd_soc_wcd9xxx wcd_dsp_glink wcd_core pinctrl_wcd wlan(O) [57742.623676] c0 0 CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Tainted: G O 4.9.223-ga7ce4286ca2d-ab6546858 #0 [57742.623696] c0 0 Hardware name: Google Inc. MSM sdm845 B1 DVT1.1 (DT) [57742.623727] c0 0 task: 0000000097327d34 task.stack: 00000000533bef44 [57742.623770] c0 0 PC is at skb_segment+0xeb8/0xf1c [57742.623786] c0 0 LR is at skb_segment+0x998/0xf1c ... [57742.625301] c0 0 1720: 0000000000000011 ffffffc13b8b1850 ffffff898aa2b530 ffffffc13b8b1770 [57742.625321] c0 0 [<000000008025a24e>] skb_segment+0xeb8/0xf1c [57742.625348] c0 0 [<00000000f0dbe6cc>] tcp_gso_segment+0xdc/0x428 [57742.625376] c0 0 [<000000009ff681a5>] tcp6_gso_segment+0x60/0x17c [57742.625391] c0 0 [<00000000ae27ff84>] ipv6_gso_segment+0x208/0x3d0 [57742.625413] c0 0 [<000000009ff20266>] skb_mac_gso_segment+0xcc/0x198 [57742.625430] c0 0 [<000000005f3e189b>] __skb_gso_segment+0xe0/0x198 [57742.625448] c0 0 [<000000002756bf90>] validate_xmit_skb+0x214/0x3ac [57742.625473] c0 0 [<00000000d536666c>] sch_direct_xmit+0x8c/0x37c [57742.625492] c0 0 [<000000006ae4cbff>] __qdisc_run+0x3e4/0x5d4 [57742.625512] c0 0 [<0000000040112c03>] __dev_queue_xmit+0x4d8/0xc9c [57742.625538] c0 0 [<000000002adaadc6>] __bpf_redirect+0x148/0x2f8 [57742.625557] c0 0 [<00000000766573a7>] __dev_queue_xmit+0x830/0xc9c [57742.625578] c0 0 [<000000006df3822d>] neigh_direct_output+0x1c/0x28 [57742.625607] c0 0 [<00000000bacb35cc>] ip_finish_output2+0x3ac/0x6cc [57742.625628] c0 0 [<00000000e7f62131>] ip_finish_output+0x2e4/0x360 [57742.625643] c0 0 [<0000000079e638f1>] ip_output+0x19c/0x274 [57742.625666] c0 0 [<0000000092e42b8c>] NF_HOOK_THRESH+0x150/0x1cc [57742.625685] c0 0 [<00000000b4e9c6f8>] ip_forward+0x468/0x510 [57742.625704] c0 0 [<00000000779cadd9>] ip_rcv_finish+0x228/0x3c0 [57742.625723] c0 0 [<000000006eee429d>] ip_rcv+0x3b8/0x53c [57742.625740] c0 0 [<00000000eabf9034>] __netif_receive_skb_core+0xb10/0xe68 [57742.625761] c0 0 [<000000009368ee55>] netif_receive_skb_internal+0x1b4/0x26c [57742.625775] c0 0 [<00000000afac19f3>] napi_gro_complete+0x5c/0x180 [57742.625795] c0 0 [<000000001a7429fd>] napi_complete_done+0x70/0x14c [57742.625824] c0 0 [<000000000876f6ad>] r8152_poll+0x1138/0x14c8 [57742.625846] c0 0 [<000000006a1f8e3a>] napi_poll+0x8c/0x2f0 [57742.625868] c0 0 [<00000000128c5761>] net_rx_action+0xa8/0x2e8 [57742.625892] c0 0 [<00000000684eda45>] __do_softirq+0x23c/0x568 [57742.625921] c0 0 [<000000008094d781>] irq_exit+0x130/0x144 [57742.625949] c0 0 [<00000000c3de88cc>] __handle_domain_irq+0x108/0x16c [57742.625963] c0 0 [<000000005c213a95>] gic_handle_irq.21048+0x124/0x19c [57742.625979] c0 0 Exception stack(0xffffff898c003c20 to 0xffffff898c003d50) [57742.625999] c0 0 3c20: ffffcb7ad1c65ff9 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 [57742.626014] c0 0 3c40: 000034852e1f1c83 0000000000000000 0000000000300000 0000000000000000 [57742.626033] c0 0 3c60: 0000000000000000 00000000000039d0 0000000000000018 003529018eb90a43 [57742.626052] c0 0 3c80: 00000000341555ac 00000000019b7894 00000000c800ffff 0000000000000000 [57742.626070] c0 0 3ca0: 00000000000003fc 00000000ffffffff ffffff898c004030 0000000000000002 [57742.626089] c0 0 3cc0: ffffffc12c4d2858 ffffffc12c4d2018 ffffff898c00f7f0 ffffff898c11f990 [57742.626107] c0 0 3ce0: 0000000000000001 00003484f804e64b ffffff898adce668 ffffff898c460108 [57742.626126] c0 0 3d00: ffffff898c460000 ffffff898c003d90 ffffff898a547e1c ffffff898c003d50 [57742.626145] c0 0 3d20: ffffff898a547e58 00000000a0c00145 ffffff898c00f7f0 ffffffc12c4d2018 [57742.626159] c0 0 3d40: ffffffffffffffff 0000000000000002 [57742.626179] c0 0 [<00000000179ba2a9>] el1_irq+0xc4/0x13c [57742.626205] c0 0 [<0000000052ad168a>] lpm_cpuidle_enter+0x5c0/0x670 [57742.626233] c0 0 [<00000000b8e10462>] cpuidle_enter_state+0x200/0x400 [57742.626260] c0 0 [<0000000048578bb9>] cpu_idle_loop+0x294/0x440 [57742.626276] c0 0 [<00000000fbf7777c>] cpu_idle_loop+0x0/0x440 [57742.626304] c0 0 [<0000000012a6efc3>] kernel_init+0x0/0x2a8 [57742.626333] c0 0 [<0000000034e25c8d>] start_kernel+0xe04/0xe0c [57742.626350] c0 0 [<000000000861285f>] __primary_switched+0x6c/0x98 [57742.626375] c0 0 Code: a94f6ffc f85f8e5e 910503ff d65f03c0 (d4210000) [57742.626419] c0 0 ---[ end trace 5245603348170006 ]--- [57742.727830] c0 0 Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception in interrupt The commit is 'a7ce4286ca2d LTS: Merge android-4.9-q (4.9.223) into android-msm-pixel-4.9' and it is crashing at https://android.googlesource.com/kernel/msm/+/a7ce4286ca2d640068055973938f69e3a069e67a/net/core/skbuff.c#3290 struct sk_buff *skb_segment(struct sk_buff *head_skb, netdev_features_t features) { ... while (pos < offset + len) { if (i >= nfrags) { BUG_ON(skb_headlen(list_skb)); <-- crash My bare bones initial analysis: This looks like an ipv4/tcp upload from rx csum/gso capable ethernet (realtek 8152 100mbps or 8153 gigabit) usb dongle hitting ipv4 nat + forwarding to v4 tun clat device, and then tc egress bpf on that v4 tun device doing clat ipv4-to-ipv6 translation and bpf_redirect to v6 only cell interface (ethernet header less), then triggering a bug in the kernel's software segmentation engine on transmit through the cellular uplink (which is a T-Mobile ipv6 only cell network). This is on a blueline 4.9 kernel. User confirmed - to paraphrase: Home internet was down. I thought I would try using ethernet tethering to power my whole home's internet. I plugged my Pixel 3 into the included USB-A to USB-C adapter, into an Insignia NS-PU98635 [note: https://www.insigniaproducts.com/pdp/NS-PU98635/3510527 ] into my Nest Wifi router [note: presumably via an ethernet cable] then turned on ethernet tethering. It seemed to work for a while, but then the phone rebooted. Carrier was Google Fi, presumably 'roaming' on T-Mobile, so ipv6-only cellular network] Internally, I already asked Willem and Eric about this, I'll quote from the initial investigation in the bug. Eric said (trimmed): skb_segment() is not yet able to segment something that GRO has aggregated with a frag_list, if gso_size has to be changed. skb_segment() is not generic enough. I tried to fix this in the past: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/94cd6f4d-09d4-11c0-64f4-bdc544bb3dcb@gmail.com/ This was the patch Herbert came up 7 years ago. https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=138419594024851&w=2 I believe my proposal was : https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg255549.html Willem said (slightly trimmed): I wonder if the fix as a result of that upstream discussion would help here, too. Basically, it falls back onto non-sg copy based segmentation for some packets. I think so. Can you check whether your kernel has this 4.19 stable backport: net: gso: Fix skb_segment splat when splitting gso_size mangled skb having linear-headed frag_list https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1128590/ The real solution is to not play gso_size games in bpf_skb_proto_[46]_to_[64], of course. I should have added support for BPF_F_ADJ_ROOM_FIXED_GSO to those functions when I introduced that. As you pointed out offline, even if we add it now, a missing flag causes runtime, not build time, failure and requires a workaround... (back story: writing bpf code that works on all manner of kernels that may or may not have all fixes/backports, and may be as old as 4.9 is challenging. Some things rely on multiple versions of the bpf code, and using the first one that successfully loads, other things depend on runtime fallbacks, etc. Here with the new flag, we'd have to do something like bpf_skb_change_proto(FIXED_GSO), and if that fails [presumably due to lack of kernel patch] fall back to bpf_skb_change_proto(0). With the revert + this patch, it'll 'just' work.) One more thing, maybe you can trigger linearization of these skbs when they traverse an intermediary device, notably tun, by disabling with ethtool -K tx-scatter-gather-fraglist Then in validate_xmit_skb on transmit from that device it should hit the skb_need_linearize (?) This is wild speculation.. Oh 4.9. Also, the bpf_redirect means that that egress path is never hit on the tun device of course. This is the 4.9 stable backport https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20190919214802.102848604@linuxfoundation.org/ To which my response was: commit 162a5a8c3aff15c449e6b38355cdf80ab4f77a5a net: gso: Fix skb_segment splat when splitting gso_size mangled skb having linear-headed frag_list git describe 162a5a8c3aff15c449e6b38355cdf80ab4f77a5a v4.9.193-6-g162a5a8c3aff So theoretically it's already in the tree... And the discussion petered out roughly a year ago. I've never found a way to trigger this on demand (via veth or otherwise) > >> (b) There is no check that the gso_size is > 20 when reducing it by 20, > >> so we might end up with a negative (or underflowing) gso_size or > >> a gso_size of 0. This can't possibly be good. > >> Indeed this is probably somehow exploitable (or at least can result > >> in a kernel crash) by delivering crafted packets and perhaps triggering > >> an infinite loop or a divide by zero... > >> As a reminder: gso_size (mss) is related to mtu, but not directly > >> derived from it: gso_size/mss may be significantly smaller then > >> one would get by deriving from local mtu. And on some nics (which > >> do loose mtu checking on receive, it may even potentially be larger, > >> for example my work pc with 1500 mtu can receive 1520 byte frames > >> [and sometimes does due to bugs in a vendor plat46 implementation]). > >> Indeed even just going from 21 to 1 is potentially problematic because > >> it increases the number of segments by a factor of 21 (think DoS, > >> or some other crash due to too many segments). > > Do you have a reproducer for creating such small gso_size from stack, is > this mainly from virtio_net side possible? If it's too small, perhaps the > gso attributes should just be cleared from the skb generally instead of > marking SKB_GSO_DODGY as we otherwise do? I don't. I tend to think it's not possible with the linux tcp stack, but it should be possible - if annoying to do - with a raw socket. You don't even need an established tcp connection, since gro will happily aggregate packets for non existing flows. So you simply need to send two consecutive ipv4/tcp segments with 20 byte tcp payload (ie. gso_size), and gro should merge them, and then ipv4-to-ipv6 conversion should result in a ipv6/tcp headers + 40 byte payload, yet 0-byte gso_size packet, and it should crash. I've checked the code and we later DIV_ROUND_UP by gso_size, which should thus div by zero. But I haven't ever actually tried to trigger it. > The change you're reverting in patch 1/2 is only in net-next, but not in > Linus tree, so there still is a large enough time window for at least the > revert. That said, I presume what you mean here is to just revert the 1/2 > in bpf-next and the 2/2 fix targeted for bpf tree, no? That would be ideal, yes. > Few follow-up questions: > > 1) Could we then also cover the case of skb_is_gso(skb) && !skb_is_gso_tcp(skb) > that we currently reject with -ENOTSUPP, in other words all GSO cases? I think so. Somehow I missed this condition even being there. If this patch series is accepted I'll follow up to remove that (presumably in bpf-next though?) > 2) Do we still need to mark SKB_GSO_DODGY and reset segs? I presume not anymore > after this change? I'm uncertain. It certainly seems safer to leave it? One could argue that any gso packet modified by bpf write operations should technically be SKB_GSO_DODGY... After all, the user may fail to even put in a valid ethernet/ipv4/ipv6(/tcp) header... That said, that seems to be user error, so I think I'd be willing to remove it, but I think that would belong in bpf-next rather than bpf. > 3) skb_{decrease,increase}_gso_size() should probably just removed then. Oh, interesting, are there no other users? But again, that would seem to be a bpf-next candidate I think? But in general I would agree playing games with gso_size is just a bad idea no matter what. - Maciej