Hello,
    I'm studying the implementation of sk_buff and I think there's a
possible race condition in skb_clone (2.6.22.9)
    The code is:


struct sk_buff *skb_clone(struct sk_buff *skb, gfp_t gfp_mask)
{
 struct sk_buff *n;

 n = skb + 1;
 if (skb->fclone == SKB_FCLONE_ORIG &&
     n->fclone == SKB_FCLONE_UNAVAILABLE) {
  atomic_t *fclone_ref = (atomic_t *) (n + 1);
  n->fclone = SKB_FCLONE_CLONE;
  atomic_inc(fclone_ref);
 } else {
  n = kmem_cache_alloc(skbuff_head_cache, gfp_mask);
  if (!n)
   return NULL;
  n->fclone = SKB_FCLONE_UNAVAILABLE;
 }

    If an skb with fast clone available (first "if" true) has
references in different CPUs (skb->users>1) (I do not find explicit
checks for this to be impossible), if skb_clone is called
simultaneously over that skb, both callers can get the same clone (the
"fast" clone) and different problems follow: wrong "clone_skb->users"
(1 as expected by the caller, but it should be, to be true, 2),
fclone_ref set to 3 involving further problems, ...

   IMO, the same problem arises although the calls to skb_clone are
not simultaneous: there isnĀ“t a memory barrier after the change of
"n->fclone" to guarantee the visibility of that change to other CPUs
(but that barrier will not solve anything; I mentioned this only to
reflect another reason I see for the race to happen).

   Is that correct? Thank you in advance.

        Santiago Font Arquer
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to