Re: [PATCH] uprobes: Free utask on dup_return_instance() failure
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-trace-kernel,dev.linux.lists.sashiko-reviews,org.kernel.vger.linux-perf-users |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 06:00:14 +0000 [email protected] wrote: > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider: > > Pre-existing issues: > - [Critical] Double free of `extra_consumers` during `fork()` due to missing pointer nullification in `dup_return_instance()` / `ri_pool_push()`. > -- > > --- Patch [1]: [PATCH] uprobes: Free utask on dup_return_instance() failure --- > commit 52bd4caeb5b9686b25fe707609034e9397c6100a > Author: Keke Ming <[email protected]> > > uprobes: Free utask on dup_return_instance() failure > > dup_utask() installs the new uprobe_task in t->utask before copying > return_instances. If dup_return_instance() fails, the partially copied > utask is left attached to the child task. This patch frees the partially > copied utask before returning -ENOMEM. > > > diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c > > index 7709ea8824778..7547929ab294d 100644 > > --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c > > +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c > > @@ -2140,8 +2140,10 @@ static int dup_utask(struct task_struct *t, struct uprobe_task *o_utask) > > p = &n_utask->return_instances; > > for (o = o_utask->return_instances; o; o = o->next) { > > n = dup_return_instance(o); > > - if (!n) > > + if (!n) { > > + uprobe_free_utask(t); > > [Severity: Critical] > This is a pre-existing issue, but can dup_return_instance() leave a dangling > pointer that results in a double free of extra_consumers when > uprobe_free_utask() is called here? Hmm, this seems another bug here. > > If a multi-consumer uretprobe is hit, extra_consumers is allocated. When this > returns, it is pushed to the reuse pool: > > kernel/events/uprobes.c:ri_pool_push() { > ri->cons_cnt = 0; > ri->next = utask->ri_pool; > utask->ri_pool = ri; > } > > This resets cons_cnt to 0 but retains the extra_consumers heap pointer. > > If the thread then hits a single-consumer uretprobe, alloc_return_instance() > reuses the pooled object. push_consumer() increments cons_cnt to 1 and uses > the inline consumer, leaving the old extra_consumers pointer untouched. > > When the task calls fork(), dup_return_instance() does a shallow copy: > > kernel/events/uprobes.c:dup_return_instance() { > ri = kmemdup(old, sizeof(*ri), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!ri) > return NULL; > > if (unlikely(old->cons_cnt > 1)) { > ri->extra_consumers = kmemdup(old->extra_consumers, ... > ... > } > > Since old->cons_cnt == 1, it skips deep-copying or clearing extra_consumers. > Both the parent and child tasks now share the exact same heap pointer. Hmm, so either clearing extra_consumers when returning ri to the pool (with releasing extra_consumers) or clearing new ri->extra_consumers when dup_return_instance(), will fix this. Thanks, > > When the tasks exit, or if dup_return_instance() fails and triggers the new > cleanup path in this patch, ri_free() will execute kfree(ri->extra_consumers) > in both contexts, freeing the same memory twice. > > > return -ENOMEM; > > + } > > > > /* if uprobe is non-NULL, we'll have an extra refcount for uprobe */ > > uprobe = hprobe_expire(&o->hprobe, true); > > -- > Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected]?part=1 > -- Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]>