Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 30 Nov 2022 22:34:56 +0900
From:   asmadeus@codewreck.org
To:     Schspa Shi <schspa@gmail.com>
Cc:     ericvh@gmail.com, lucho@ionkov.net, linux_oss@crudebyte.com,
        davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
        pabeni@redhat.com, v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        syzbot+8f1060e2aaf8ca55220b@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 9p: fix crash when transaction killed
Message-ID: <Y4dcAGM+0xzOgSCa@codewreck.org>
References: <20221129162251.90790-1-schspa@gmail.com>
 <Y4aJzjlkkt5VKy0G@codewreck.org>
 <m2r0xli1mq.fsf@gmail.com>
 <Y4b1MQaEsPRK+3lF@codewreck.org>
 <m2o7sowzas.fsf@gmail.com>
 <Y4c5N/SAuszTLiEA@codewreck.org>
 <m2a6487f23.fsf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <m2a6487f23.fsf@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Schspa Shi wrote on Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 09:15:12PM +0800:
> >> If the req was newly alloced(It was at a new page), refcount maybe not
> >> 0, there will be problem in this case. It seems we can't relay on this.
> >> 
> >> We need to set the refcount to zero before add it to idr in p9_tag_alloc.
> >
> > Hmm, if it's reused then it's zero by definition, but if it's a new
> > allocation (uninitialized) then anything goes; that lookup could find
> > and increase it before the refcount_set, and we'd have an off by one
> > leading to use after free. Good catch!
> >
> > Initializing it to zero will lead to the client busy-looping until after
> > the refcount is properly set, which should work.
> 
> Why? It looks no different from the previous process here. Initializing
> it to zero should makes no difference.

I do not understand this remark.
If this is a freed request it will be zero, because we freed the request
as the refcount hit zero, but if it's a newly allocated request then the
memory is uninitalized, and the lookup can get anything.

In that case we want refcount to be zero to have the check in
p9_tag_lookup to not use the request until we set the refcount to 2.


> > Setting refcount early might have us use an re-used req before the tag
> > has been changed so that one cannot move.
> >
> > Could you test with just that changed if syzbot still reproduces this
> > bug? (perhaps add a comment if you send this)
> >
> 
> I have upload a new v2 change for this. But I can't easily reproduce
> this problem.

Ah, I read that v2 as you actually ran some tests with this, sorry for
the misuderstanding.

Well, it's a fix anyway, so it cannot hurt to apply...
-- 
Dominique