From: Zhang Changzhong <zhangchangzh...@huawei.com>

[ Upstream commit 08c487d8d807535f509ed80c6a10ad90e6872139 ]

When a netdev down event occurs after a successful call to
j1939_sk_bind(), j1939_netdev_notify() can handle it correctly.

But if the netdev already in down state before calling j1939_sk_bind(),
j1939_sk_release() will stay in wait_event_interruptible() blocked
forever. Because in this case, j1939_netdev_notify() won't be called and
j1939_tp_txtimer() won't call j1939_session_cancel() or other function
to clear session for ENETDOWN error, this lead to mismatch of
j1939_session_get/put() and jsk->skb_pending will never decrease to
zero.

To reproduce it use following commands:
1. ip link add dev vcan0 type vcan
2. j1939acd -r 100,80-120 1122334455667788 vcan0
3. presses ctrl-c and thread will be blocked forever

This patch adds check for ndev->flags in j1939_sk_bind() to avoid this
kind of situation and return with -ENETDOWN.

Fixes: 9d71dd0c7009 ("can: add support of SAE J1939 protocol")
Signed-off-by: Zhang Changzhong <zhangchangzh...@huawei.com>
Link: 
https://lore.kernel.org/r/1599460308-18770-1-git-send-email-zhangchangzh...@huawei.com
Acked-by: Oleksij Rempel <o.rem...@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <m...@pengutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sas...@kernel.org>
---
 net/can/j1939/socket.c | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/net/can/j1939/socket.c b/net/can/j1939/socket.c
index bf9fd6ee88fe0..0470909605392 100644
--- a/net/can/j1939/socket.c
+++ b/net/can/j1939/socket.c
@@ -475,6 +475,12 @@ static int j1939_sk_bind(struct socket *sock, struct 
sockaddr *uaddr, int len)
                        goto out_release_sock;
                }
 
+               if (!(ndev->flags & IFF_UP)) {
+                       dev_put(ndev);
+                       ret = -ENETDOWN;
+                       goto out_release_sock;
+               }
+
                priv = j1939_netdev_start(ndev);
                dev_put(ndev);
                if (IS_ERR(priv)) {
-- 
2.27.0



Reply via email to