can: Fix kernel panic at security_sock_rcv_skb

can: Fix kernel panic at security_sock_rcv_skb

Zhang Yanmin reported crashes [1] and provided a patch adding a
synchronize_rcu() call in can_rx_unregister()

The main problem seems that the sockets themselves are not RCU
protected.

If CAN uses RCU for delivery, then sockets should be freed only after
one RCU grace period.

Recent kernels could use sock_set_flag(sk, SOCK_RCU_FREE), but let's
ease stable backports with the following fix instead.

[1]
BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at (null)
IP: [<ffffffff81495e25>] selinux_socket_sock_rcv_skb+0x65/0x2a0

Call Trace:
 <IRQ>
 [<ffffffff81485d8c>] security_sock_rcv_skb+0x4c/0x60
 [<ffffffff81d55771>] sk_filter+0x41/0x210
 [<ffffffff81d12913>] sock_queue_rcv_skb+0x53/0x3a0
 [<ffffffff81f0a2b3>] raw_rcv+0x2a3/0x3c0
 [<ffffffff81f06eab>] can_rcv_filter+0x12b/0x370
 [<ffffffff81f07af9>] can_receive+0xd9/0x120
 [<ffffffff81f07beb>] can_rcv+0xab/0x100
 [<ffffffff81d362ac>] __netif_receive_skb_core+0xd8c/0x11f0
 [<ffffffff81d36734>] __netif_receive_skb+0x24/0xb0
 [<ffffffff81d37f67>] process_backlog+0x127/0x280
 [<ffffffff81d36f7b>] net_rx_action+0x33b/0x4f0
 [<ffffffff810c88d4>] __do_softirq+0x184/0x440
 [<ffffffff81f9e86c>] do_softirq_own_stack+0x1c/0x30
 <EOI>
 [<ffffffff810c76fb>] do_softirq.part.18+0x3b/0x40
 [<ffffffff810c8bed>] do_softirq+0x1d/0x20
 [<ffffffff81d30085>] netif_rx_ni+0xe5/0x110
 [<ffffffff8199cc87>] slcan_receive_buf+0x507/0x520
 [<ffffffff8167ef7c>] flush_to_ldisc+0x21c/0x230
 [<ffffffff810e3baf>] process_one_work+0x24f/0x670
 [<ffffffff810e44ed>] worker_thread+0x9d/0x6f0
 [<ffffffff810e4450>] ? rescuer_thread+0x480/0x480
 [<ffffffff810ebafc>] kthread+0x12c/0x150
 [<ffffffff81f9ccef>] ret_from_fork+0x3f/0x70

Reported-by: Zhang Yanmin <yanmin.zhang@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>