Received-SPF: Pass (protection.outlook.com: domain of nvidia.com designates
 216.228.112.34 as permitted sender) receiver=protection.outlook.com;
 client-ip=216.228.112.34; helo=mail.nvidia.com;
References: <20211102021218.955277-1-william.xuanziyang@huawei.com>
 <87k0h9bb9x.fsf@nvidia.com>
 <20211115094940.138d86dc@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
User-agent: mu4e 1.4.15; emacs 27.2
From:   Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
CC:     Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>,
        Ziyang Xuan <william.xuanziyang@huawei.com>,
        <davem@davemloft.net>, <jgg@nvidia.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: vlan: fix a UAF in vlan_dev_real_dev()
In-Reply-To: <20211115094940.138d86dc@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Nov 2021 12:50:59 +0100
Message-ID: <87a6i3t2zg.fsf@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Nov 2021 11:51:04.7146
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 6cf1f4a7-652c-4255-9aad-08d9a9c0891e
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalAttributedTenantConnectingIp: TenantId=43083d15-7273-40c1-b7db-39efd9ccc17a;Ip=[216.228.112.34];Helo=[mail.nvidia.com]
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BN8NAM11FT038.eop-nam11.prod.protection.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Anonymous
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: HybridOnPrem
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: MN2PR12MB2912
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> writes:

> On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 18:04:42 +0100 Petr Machata wrote:
>> Ziyang Xuan <william.xuanziyang@huawei.com> writes:
>> 
>> > diff --git a/net/8021q/vlan.c b/net/8021q/vlan.c
>> > index 55275ef9a31a..a3a0a5e994f5 100644
>> > --- a/net/8021q/vlan.c
>> > +++ b/net/8021q/vlan.c
>> > @@ -123,9 +123,6 @@ void unregister_vlan_dev(struct net_device *dev, struct list_head *head)
>> >  	}
>> >  
>> >  	vlan_vid_del(real_dev, vlan->vlan_proto, vlan_id);
>> > -
>> > -	/* Get rid of the vlan's reference to real_dev */
>> > -	dev_put(real_dev);
>> >  }
>> >  
>> >  int vlan_check_real_dev(struct net_device *real_dev,
>> > diff --git a/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c b/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c
>> > index 0c21d1fec852..aeeb5f90417b 100644
>> > --- a/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c
>> > +++ b/net/8021q/vlan_dev.c
>> > @@ -843,6 +843,9 @@ static void vlan_dev_free(struct net_device *dev)
>> >  
>> >  	free_percpu(vlan->vlan_pcpu_stats);
>> >  	vlan->vlan_pcpu_stats = NULL;
>> > +
>> > +	/* Get rid of the vlan's reference to real_dev */
>> > +	dev_put(vlan->real_dev);
>> >  }
>> >  
>> >  void vlan_setup(struct net_device *dev)  
>> 
>> This is causing reference counting issues when vetoing is involved.
>> Consider the following snippet:
>> 
>>     ip link add name bond1 type bond mode 802.3ad
>>     ip link set dev swp1 master bond1
>>     ip link add name bond1.100 link bond1 type vlan protocol 802.1ad id 100
>>     # ^ vetoed, no netdevice created
>>     ip link del dev bond1
>> 
>> The setup process goes like this: vlan_newlink() calls
>> register_vlan_dev() calls netdev_upper_dev_link() calls
>> __netdev_upper_dev_link(), which issues a notifier
>> NETDEV_PRECHANGEUPPER, which yields a non-zero error,
>> because a listener vetoed it.
>> 
>> So it unwinds, skipping dev_hold(real_dev), but eventually the VLAN ends
>> up decreasing reference count of the real_dev. Then when when the bond
>> netdevice is removed, we get an endless loop of:
>> 
>>     kernel:unregister_netdevice: waiting for bond1 to become free. Usage count = 0 
>> 
>> Moving the dev_hold(real_dev) to always happen even if the
>> netdev_upper_dev_link() call makes the issue go away.
>
> I think we should move the dev_hold() to ndo_init(), otherwise 
> it's hard to reason if destructor was invoked or not if
> register_netdevice() errors out.

Ziyang Xuan, do you intend to take care of this?