Re: [PATCH net v4] l2tp: Serialize access to sk_user_data with sk_callback_lock

[Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>]

On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 01:07 AM -08, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 5:30 AM <patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hello:
>>
>> This patch was applied to netdev/net.git (master)
>> by David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>:
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 20:16:19 +0100 you wrote:
>> > sk->sk_user_data has multiple users, which are not compatible with each
>> > other. Writers must synchronize by grabbing the sk->sk_callback_lock.
>> >
>> > l2tp currently fails to grab the lock when modifying the underlying tunnel
>> > socket fields. Fix it by adding appropriate locking.
>> >
>> > We err on the side of safety and grab the sk_callback_lock also inside the
>> > sk_destruct callback overridden by l2tp, even though there should be no
>> > refs allowing access to the sock at the time when sk_destruct gets called.
>> >
>> > [...]
>>
>> Here is the summary with links:
>>   - [net,v4] l2tp: Serialize access to sk_user_data with sk_callback_lock
>>     https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/b68777d54fac
>>
>>
>
> I guess this patch has not been tested with LOCKDEP, right ?
>
> sk_callback_lock always needs _bh safety.
>
> I will send something like:
>
> diff --git a/net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c b/net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c
> index 754fdda8a5f52e4e8e2c0f47331c3b22765033d0..a3b06a3cf68248f5ec7ae8be2a9711d0f482ac36
> 100644
> --- a/net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c
> +++ b/net/l2tp/l2tp_core.c
> @@ -1474,7 +1474,7 @@ int l2tp_tunnel_register(struct l2tp_tunnel
> *tunnel, struct net *net,
>         }
>
>         sk = sock->sk;
> -       write_lock(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
> +       write_lock_bh(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
>
>         ret = l2tp_validate_socket(sk, net, tunnel->encap);
>         if (ret < 0)
> @@ -1522,7 +1522,7 @@ int l2tp_tunnel_register(struct l2tp_tunnel
> *tunnel, struct net *net,
>         if (tunnel->fd >= 0)
>                 sockfd_put(sock);
>
> -       write_unlock(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
> +       write_unlock_bh(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
>         return 0;
>
>  err_sock:
> @@ -1531,7 +1531,7 @@ int l2tp_tunnel_register(struct l2tp_tunnel
> *tunnel, struct net *net,
>         else
>                 sockfd_put(sock);
>
> -       write_unlock(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
> +       write_unlock_bh(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
>  err:
>         return ret;
>  }

Hmm, weird. I double checked - I have PROVE_LOCKING enabled.
Didn't see any lockdep reports when running selftests/net/l2tp.sh.

I my defense - I thought _bh was not needed because
l2tp_tunnel_register() gets called only in the process context. I mean,
it's triggered by Netlink sendmsg, but that gets processed in-line
AFAIU:

netlink_sendmsg
  netlink_unicast
    ->netlink_rcv
      genl_rcv
        genl_rcv_msg
          genl_family_rcv_msg
            genl_family_rcv_msg_doit
              ->doit
                l2tp_nl_cmd_tunnel_create
                  l2tp_tunnel_register