Skip to content
Commit 2fd89584 authored by David Howells's avatar David Howells Committed by Jakub Kicinski
Browse files

rxrpc: Fix notification vs call-release vs recvmsg



When a call is released, rxrpc takes the spinlock and removes it from
->recvmsg_q in an effort to prevent racing recvmsg() invocations from
seeing the same call.  Now, rxrpc_recvmsg() only takes the spinlock when
actually removing a call from the queue; it doesn't, however, take it in
the lead up to that when it checks to see if the queue is empty.  It *does*
hold the socket lock, which prevents a recvmsg/recvmsg race - but this
doesn't prevent sendmsg from ending the call because sendmsg() drops the
socket lock and relies on the call->user_mutex.

Fix this by firstly removing the bit in rxrpc_release_call() that dequeues
the released call and, instead, rely on recvmsg() to simply discard
released calls (done in a preceding fix).

Secondly, rxrpc_notify_socket() is abandoned if the call is already marked
as released rather than trying to be clever by setting both pointers in
call->recvmsg_link to NULL to trick list_empty().  This isn't perfect and
can still race, resulting in a released call on the queue, but recvmsg()
will now clean that up.

Fixes: 17926a79 ("[AF_RXRPC]: Provide secure RxRPC sockets for use by userspace and kernel both")
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarJeffrey Altman <jaltman@auristor.com>
cc: Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>
cc: Junvyyang, Tencent Zhuque Lab <zhuque@tencent.com>
cc: LePremierHomme <kwqcheii@proton.me>
cc: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
cc: linux-afs@lists.infradead.org
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20250717074350.3767366-4-dhowells@redhat.com


Signed-off-by: default avatarJakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
parent 962fb1f6
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
0% Loading or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment