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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20221223133618.10323-1-liuxin350@huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <20221223133618.10323-1-liuxin350@huawei.com>
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Dec 2022 13:43:56 -0800
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzYYvs0TgA5aE41z7_ZQ8qa0=ird3P4hCFn3Xxj7km49-w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: fix errno is overwritten after being closed.
To:     Xin Liu <liuxin350@huawei.com>
Cc:     andrii@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
        martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org, yhs@fb.com,
        john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@google.com,
        haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yanan@huawei.com,
        wuchangye@huawei.com, xiesongyang@huawei.com,
        kongweibin2@huawei.com, zhangmingyi5@huawei.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 5:36 AM Xin Liu <liuxin350@huawei.com> wrote:
>
> In the ensure_good_fd function, if the fcntl function succeeds but
> the close function fails, ensure_good_fd returns a normal fd and
> sets errno, which may cause users to misunderstand. The close
> failure is not a serious problem, and the correct FD has been
> handed over to the upper-layer application. Let's restore errno here.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xin Liu <liuxin350@huawei.com>
> ---
>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
> index 377642ff51fc..98333a6c38e9 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
> @@ -543,10 +543,9 @@ static inline int ensure_good_fd(int fd)
>                 fd = fcntl(fd, F_DUPFD_CLOEXEC, 3);
>                 saved_errno = errno;
>                 close(old_fd);
> -               if (fd < 0) {
> +               errno = saved_errno;
> +               if (fd < 0)
>                         pr_warn("failed to dup FD %d to FD > 2: %d\n", old_fd, -saved_errno);
> -                       errno = saved_errno;

pr_warn calls into user-provided callback, which can clobber errno, so
`errno = saved_errno` should happen after pr_warn. With your change
there is even higher chance of errno clobbering.

Please send a follow up fix to unconditionally restore errno *after*
pr_warn, thanks.

> -               }
>         }
>         return fd;
>  }
> --
> 2.33.0
>