lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: WARNING: ODEBUG bug in tcf_queue_work
On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:44 PM Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 05 Mar 2020 10:45:10 -0800
> > syzbot found the following crash on:
> >
> > HEAD commit: 63623fd4 Merge tag 'for-linus' of git://git.kernel.org/pub..
> > git tree: upstream
> > console output: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/log.txt?x=10535e45e00000
> > kernel config: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/.config?x=9833e26bab355358
> > dashboard link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=9c2df9fd5e9445b74e01
> > compiler: gcc (GCC) 9.0.0 20181231 (experimental)
> > syz repro: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.syz?x=168c4839e00000
> > C reproducer: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/x/repro.c?x=10587419e00000
> >
> > IMPORTANT: if you fix the bug, please add the following tag to the commit:
> > Reported-by: syzbot+9c2df9fd5e9445b74e01@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> >
> > ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > ODEBUG: activate active (active state 1) object type: rcu_head hint: 0x0
> > WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 9599 at lib/debugobjects.c:485 debug_print_object+0x168/0x250 lib/debugobjects.c:485
> > Kernel panic - not syncing: panic_on_warn set ...
> > CPU: 0 PID: 9599 Comm: syz-executor772 Not tainted 5.6.0-rc3-syzkaller #0
> > Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS Google 01/01/2011
> > Call Trace:
> > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:77 [inline]
> > dump_stack+0x197/0x210 lib/dump_stack.c:118
> > panic+0x2e3/0x75c kernel/panic.c:221
> > __warn.cold+0x2f/0x3e kernel/panic.c:582
> > report_bug+0x289/0x300 lib/bug.c:195
> > fixup_bug arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:174 [inline]
> > fixup_bug arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:169 [inline]
> > do_error_trap+0x11b/0x200 arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:267
> > do_invalid_op+0x37/0x50 arch/x86/kernel/traps.c:286
> > invalid_op+0x23/0x30 arch/x86/entry/entry_64.S:1027
> > RIP: 0010:debug_print_object+0x168/0x250 lib/debugobjects.c:485
> > Code: dd 00 e7 91 88 48 89 fa 48 c1 ea 03 80 3c 02 00 0f 85 b5 00 00 00 48 8b 14 dd 00 e7 91 88 48 c7 c7 60 dc 91 88 e8 07 6e 9f fd <0f> 0b 83 05 03 6c ff 06 01 48 83 c4 20 5b 41 5c 41 5d 41 5e 5d c3
> > RSP: 0018:ffffc90005cd70b0 EFLAGS: 00010286
> > RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: 0000000000000003 RCX: 0000000000000000
> > RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffffffff815ebe46 RDI: fffff52000b9ae08
> > RBP: ffffc90005cd70f0 R08: ffff888093472400 R09: fffffbfff16a3370
> > R10: fffffbfff16a336f R11: ffffffff8b519b7f R12: 0000000000000001
> > R13: ffffffff89bac220 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 1ffff92000b9ae24
> > debug_object_activate+0x346/0x470 lib/debugobjects.c:652
> > debug_rcu_head_queue kernel/rcu/rcu.h:176 [inline]
> > __call_rcu kernel/rcu/tree.c:2597 [inline]
> > call_rcu+0x2f/0x700 kernel/rcu/tree.c:2683
> > queue_rcu_work+0x8a/0xa0 kernel/workqueue.c:1742
> > tcf_queue_work+0xd3/0x110 net/sched/cls_api.c:206
> > route4_change+0x19e8/0x2250 net/sched/cls_route.c:550
> > tc_new_tfilter+0xb82/0x2480 net/sched/cls_api.c:2103
> > rtnetlink_rcv_msg+0x824/0xaf0 net/core/rtnetlink.c:5427
> > netlink_rcv_skb+0x177/0x450 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:2478
> > rtnetlink_rcv+0x1d/0x30 net/core/rtnetlink.c:5454
> > netlink_unicast_kernel net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1303 [inline]
> > netlink_unicast+0x59e/0x7e0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1329
> > netlink_sendmsg+0x91c/0xea0 net/netlink/af_netlink.c:1918
> > sock_sendmsg_nosec net/socket.c:652 [inline]
> > sock_sendmsg+0xd7/0x130 net/socket.c:672
> > ____sys_sendmsg+0x753/0x880 net/socket.c:2343
> > ___sys_sendmsg+0x100/0x170 net/socket.c:2397
> > __sys_sendmsg+0x105/0x1d0 net/socket.c:2430
> > __do_sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2439 [inline]
> > __se_sys_sendmsg net/socket.c:2437 [inline]
> > __x64_sys_sendmsg+0x78/0xb0 net/socket.c:2437
> > do_syscall_64+0xfa/0x790 arch/x86/entry/common.c:294
> > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe
>
> Add a put callback for cls_route4_ops in an attempt to pair with get.

This does not look like a refcnt pairing issue, it seems to be a
double "free", more precisely, we call call_rcu() twice on the same
object. I guess for some reason 'fold' is still visible even after
it is scheduled to be freed by rcu work.

I will take a deeper look tomorrow.

Thanks.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-11 06:26    [W:0.069 / U:5.304 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site