Transport assignment may race with module unload. Protect new_transport
from becoming a stale pointer.
This also takes care of an insecure call in vsock_use_local_transport();
add a lockdep assert.
BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff8056000
Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN
RIP: 0010:vsock_assign_transport+0x366/0x600
Call Trace:
vsock_connect+0x59c/0xc40
__sys_connect+0xe8/0x100
__x64_sys_connect+0x6e/0xc0
do_syscall_64+0x92/0x1c0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53
Fixes: c0cfa2d8a788 ("vsock: add multi-transports support")
Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
---
net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
index 39473b9e0829f240045262aef00cbae82a425dcc..9b2af5c63f7c2ae575c160415bd77208a3980835 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
@@ -407,6 +407,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_enqueue_accept);
static bool vsock_use_local_transport(unsigned int remote_cid)
{
+ lockdep_assert_held(&vsock_register_mutex);
+
if (!transport_local)
return false;
@@ -464,6 +466,8 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk)
remote_flags = vsk->remote_addr.svm_flags;
+ mutex_lock(&vsock_register_mutex);
+
switch (sk->sk_type) {
case SOCK_DGRAM:
new_transport = transport_dgram;
@@ -479,12 +483,15 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk)
new_transport = transport_h2g;
break;
default:
- return -ESOCKTNOSUPPORT;
+ ret = -ESOCKTNOSUPPORT;
+ goto err;
}
if (vsk->transport) {
- if (vsk->transport == new_transport)
- return 0;
+ if (vsk->transport == new_transport) {
+ ret = 0;
+ goto err;
+ }
/* transport->release() must be called with sock lock acquired.
* This path can only be taken during vsock_connect(), where we
@@ -508,8 +515,16 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk)
/* We increase the module refcnt to prevent the transport unloading
* while there are open sockets assigned to it.
*/
- if (!new_transport || !try_module_get(new_transport->module))
- return -ENODEV;
+ if (!new_transport || !try_module_get(new_transport->module)) {
+ ret = -ENODEV;
+ goto err;
+ }
+
+ /* It's safe to release the mutex after a successful try_module_get().
+ * Whichever transport `new_transport` points at, it won't go await
+ * until the last module_put() below or in vsock_deassign_transport().
+ */
+ mutex_unlock(&vsock_register_mutex);
if (sk->sk_type == SOCK_SEQPACKET) {
if (!new_transport->seqpacket_allow ||
@@ -528,6 +543,9 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk)
vsk->transport = new_transport;
return 0;
+err:
+ mutex_unlock(&vsock_register_mutex);
+ return ret;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_assign_transport);
--
2.49.0
On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 03:38:44PM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote: >Transport assignment may race with module unload. Protect new_transport >from becoming a stale pointer. > >This also takes care of an insecure call in vsock_use_local_transport(); >add a lockdep assert. > >BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff8056000 >Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN >RIP: 0010:vsock_assign_transport+0x366/0x600 >Call Trace: > vsock_connect+0x59c/0xc40 > __sys_connect+0xe8/0x100 > __x64_sys_connect+0x6e/0xc0 > do_syscall_64+0x92/0x1c0 > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53 > >Fixes: c0cfa2d8a788 ("vsock: add multi-transports support") >Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> >Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co> >--- > net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >index 39473b9e0829f240045262aef00cbae82a425dcc..9b2af5c63f7c2ae575c160415bd77208a3980835 100644 >--- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >@@ -407,6 +407,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_enqueue_accept); > > static bool vsock_use_local_transport(unsigned int remote_cid) > { >+ lockdep_assert_held(&vsock_register_mutex); >+ > if (!transport_local) > return false; > >@@ -464,6 +466,8 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk) > > remote_flags = vsk->remote_addr.svm_flags; > >+ mutex_lock(&vsock_register_mutex); >+ > switch (sk->sk_type) { > case SOCK_DGRAM: > new_transport = transport_dgram; >@@ -479,12 +483,15 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk) > new_transport = transport_h2g; > break; > default: >- return -ESOCKTNOSUPPORT; >+ ret = -ESOCKTNOSUPPORT; >+ goto err; > } > > if (vsk->transport) { >- if (vsk->transport == new_transport) >- return 0; >+ if (vsk->transport == new_transport) { >+ ret = 0; >+ goto err; >+ } > > /* transport->release() must be called with sock lock acquired. > * This path can only be taken during vsock_connect(), where we >@@ -508,8 +515,16 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk) > /* We increase the module refcnt to prevent the transport unloading > * while there are open sockets assigned to it. > */ >- if (!new_transport || !try_module_get(new_transport->module)) >- return -ENODEV; >+ if (!new_transport || !try_module_get(new_transport->module)) { >+ ret = -ENODEV; >+ goto err; >+ } >+ >+ /* It's safe to release the mutex after a successful try_module_get(). >+ * Whichever transport `new_transport` points at, it won't go await Little typo, s/await/away Up to you to resend or not. My R-b stay for both cases. Thanks, Stefano >+ * until the last module_put() below or in vsock_deassign_transport(). >+ */ >+ mutex_unlock(&vsock_register_mutex); > > if (sk->sk_type == SOCK_SEQPACKET) { > if (!new_transport->seqpacket_allow || >@@ -528,6 +543,9 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk) > vsk->transport = new_transport; > > return 0; >+err: >+ mutex_unlock(&vsock_register_mutex); >+ return ret; > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_assign_transport); > > >-- >2.49.0 >
On 7/3/25 10:20, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > On Wed, Jul 02, 2025 at 03:38:44PM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote: >> Transport assignment may race with module unload. Protect new_transport >>from becoming a stale pointer. >> >> This also takes care of an insecure call in vsock_use_local_transport(); >> add a lockdep assert. >> >> BUG: unable to handle page fault for address: fffffbfff8056000 >> Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] SMP KASAN >> RIP: 0010:vsock_assign_transport+0x366/0x600 >> Call Trace: >> vsock_connect+0x59c/0xc40 >> __sys_connect+0xe8/0x100 >> __x64_sys_connect+0x6e/0xc0 >> do_syscall_64+0x92/0x1c0 >> entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53 >> >> Fixes: c0cfa2d8a788 ("vsock: add multi-transports support") >> Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com> >> Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co> >> --- >> net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >> index 39473b9e0829f240045262aef00cbae82a425dcc..9b2af5c63f7c2ae575c160415bd77208a3980835 100644 >> --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >> +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c >> @@ -407,6 +407,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_enqueue_accept); >> >> static bool vsock_use_local_transport(unsigned int remote_cid) >> { >> + lockdep_assert_held(&vsock_register_mutex); >> + >> if (!transport_local) >> return false; >> >> @@ -464,6 +466,8 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk) >> >> remote_flags = vsk->remote_addr.svm_flags; >> >> + mutex_lock(&vsock_register_mutex); >> + >> switch (sk->sk_type) { >> case SOCK_DGRAM: >> new_transport = transport_dgram; >> @@ -479,12 +483,15 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk) >> new_transport = transport_h2g; >> break; >> default: >> - return -ESOCKTNOSUPPORT; >> + ret = -ESOCKTNOSUPPORT; >> + goto err; >> } >> >> if (vsk->transport) { >> - if (vsk->transport == new_transport) >> - return 0; >> + if (vsk->transport == new_transport) { >> + ret = 0; >> + goto err; >> + } >> >> /* transport->release() must be called with sock lock acquired. >> * This path can only be taken during vsock_connect(), where we >> @@ -508,8 +515,16 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk) >> /* We increase the module refcnt to prevent the transport unloading >> * while there are open sockets assigned to it. >> */ >> - if (!new_transport || !try_module_get(new_transport->module)) >> - return -ENODEV; >> + if (!new_transport || !try_module_get(new_transport->module)) { >> + ret = -ENODEV; >> + goto err; >> + } >> + >> + /* It's safe to release the mutex after a successful try_module_get(). >> + * Whichever transport `new_transport` points at, it won't go await > > Little typo, s/await/away > > Up to you to resend or not. My R-b stay for both cases. Arrgh, thanks. I'll fix it. pw-bot: changes-requested
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.