5.10-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Stefano Garzarella sgarzare@redhat.com
commit f7c877e7535260cc7a21484c994e8ce7e8cb6780 upstream.
Syzbot reported a potential lock inversion deadlock between vsock_register_mutex and sk_lock-AF_VSOCK when vsock_linger() is called.
The issue was introduced by commit 687aa0c5581b ("vsock: Fix transport_* TOCTOU") which added vsock_register_mutex locking in vsock_assign_transport() around the transport->release() call, that can call vsock_linger(). vsock_assign_transport() can be called with sk_lock held. vsock_linger() calls sk_wait_event() that temporarily releases and re-acquires sk_lock. During this window, if another thread hold vsock_register_mutex while trying to acquire sk_lock, a circular dependency is created.
Fix this by releasing vsock_register_mutex before calling transport->release() and vsock_deassign_transport(). This is safe because we don't need to hold vsock_register_mutex while releasing the old transport, and we ensure the new transport won't disappear by obtaining a module reference first via try_module_get().
Reported-by: syzbot+10e35716f8e4929681fa@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Tested-by: syzbot+10e35716f8e4929681fa@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: 687aa0c5581b ("vsock: Fix transport_* TOCTOU") Cc: mhal@rbox.co Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella sgarzare@redhat.com Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20251021121718.137668-1-sgarzare@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni pabeni@redhat.com [Stefano: fixed context since 5.10 is missing SEQPACKET support in vsock] Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella sgarzare@redhat.com Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org --- net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++------------------- 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -479,12 +479,26 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_ goto err; }
- if (vsk->transport) { - if (vsk->transport == new_transport) { - ret = 0; - goto err; - } + if (vsk->transport && vsk->transport == new_transport) { + ret = 0; + goto err; + } + + /* We increase the module refcnt to prevent the transport unloading + * while there are open sockets assigned to it. + */ + if (!new_transport || !try_module_get(new_transport->module)) { + ret = -ENODEV; + goto err; + } + + /* It's safe to release the mutex after a successful try_module_get(). + * Whichever transport `new_transport` points at, it won't go away until + * the last module_put() below or in vsock_deassign_transport(). + */ + mutex_unlock(&vsock_register_mutex);
+ if (vsk->transport) { /* transport->release() must be called with sock lock acquired. * This path can only be taken during vsock_stream_connect(), * where we have already held the sock lock. @@ -504,20 +518,6 @@ int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_ vsk->peer_shutdown = 0; }
- /* We increase the module refcnt to prevent the transport unloading - * while there are open sockets assigned to it. - */ - if (!new_transport || !try_module_get(new_transport->module)) { - ret = -ENODEV; - goto err; - } - - /* It's safe to release the mutex after a successful try_module_get(). - * Whichever transport `new_transport` points at, it won't go away until - * the last module_put() below or in vsock_deassign_transport(). - */ - mutex_unlock(&vsock_register_mutex); - ret = new_transport->init(vsk, psk); if (ret) { module_put(new_transport->module);