[patch 07/74] net: sk_prot_alloc() should not blindly overwrite memory

[Greg KH]

2.6.30-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

------------------

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx>

[ Upstream commit e912b1142be8f1e2c71c71001dc992c6e5eb2ec1 ]

Some sockets use SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU, and our RCU code correctness
depends on sk->sk_nulls_node.next being always valid. A NULL
value is not allowed as it might fault a lockless reader.

Current sk_prot_alloc() implementation doesnt respect this hypothesis,
calling kmem_cache_alloc() with __GFP_ZERO. Just call memset() around
the forbidden field.

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx>
---
 net/core/sock.c |   19 +++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/net/core/sock.c
+++ b/net/core/sock.c
@@ -935,8 +935,23 @@ static struct sock *sk_prot_alloc(struct
 	struct kmem_cache *slab;
 
 	slab = prot->slab;
-	if (slab != NULL)
-		sk = kmem_cache_alloc(slab, priority);
+	if (slab != NULL) {
+		sk = kmem_cache_alloc(slab, priority & ~__GFP_ZERO);
+		if (!sk)
+			return sk;
+		if (priority & __GFP_ZERO) {
+			/*
+			 * caches using SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU should let
+			 * sk_node.next un-modified. Special care is taken
+			 * when initializing object to zero.
+			 */
+			if (offsetof(struct sock, sk_node.next) != 0)
+				memset(sk, 0, offsetof(struct sock, sk_node.next));
+			memset(&sk->sk_node.pprev, 0,
+			       prot->obj_size - offsetof(struct sock,
+							 sk_node.pprev));
+		}
+	}
 	else
 		sk = kmalloc(prot->obj_size, priority);
 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/