Re: [PATCH] io_uring/net: clear stale vec on buffer peek error after expansion
Jens Axboe <[email protected]> Wed, 8 Jul 2026 09:50:45 -0600
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.io-uring,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 7/8/26 9:45 AM, Gabriel Krisman Bertazi wrote: > Feng Xue <[email protected]> writes: > >> Subject: [PATCH] io_uring/net: clear stale vec on buffer peek error after expansion >> >> When io_ring_buffers_peek() expands the iovec array during a bundle >> recv retry, it frees the old array (A) and allocates a new one (B). >> If access_ok() then fails, B is also freed and -EFAULT is returned. >> >> The callers io_recv_buf_select() and io_send_select_buffer() only >> update kmsg->vec.iovec on success, so on this error path vec.iovec >> still points to freed A. The stale pointer survives into the netmsg >> alloc cache via io_netmsg_recycle() (vec.nr < IO_VEC_CACHE_SOFT_CAP >> so io_vec_free is not called). A subsequent bundle operation reuses >> the cached hdr, sees vec.iovec non-NULL, sets REQ_F_NEED_CLEANUP, >> and passes the dangling pointer back to io_ring_buffers_peek() ? >> which writes iovec entries to freed memory (use-after-free). >> >> If the alloc cache is full, the alternative cleanup path through >> io_clean_op() ? io_vec_free() kfree()s the already-freed A >> (double-free). >> >> Fix this by NULLing vec.iovec and zeroing vec.nr on the error path >> when expansion occurred (detected by arg.iovs != kmsg->vec.iovec). >> Do not call io_vec_free() here ? A is already freed by the expansion >> block, so kfree()ing it again would itself be a double-free. >> >> Apply the same fix to io_send_select_buffer() which has the identical >> update-after-success pattern. > > cleaning in the caller makes the issue much more likely to happen again > in a future use of this function. It would be better to fix the bad > semantics of io_ring_buffers_peek instead. > > In fact, this is exactly the point of this patch, which I believe > already fixed this issue: > > https://lore.kernel.org/io-uring/178338543579.49877.9882374687710864124.b4-ty@b4/T/#t Indeed, this version is just a terrible LLM version of trying to fix the same thing, but not understanding the issue. -- Jens Axboe