From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BA5DC169C4 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 21:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D256218D9 for ; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 21:13:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1549487612; bh=jhba+IjbWC2ez7bKxSZxQiEKCN5A718Uk3+rXrLB5Nw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=WwiuAtCWaLFA/B45Rnx+27mmR2+tr6UURj3siGwYL79/ce6LYZq9xbE+ky6TN1GiC wl/9PXe0WFxjU3zsISpF3ku2reeQMbpBmeScXQlevfI8p/+hN1s60Q+BZvqbKav9I0 girpwrH/vLvPpkyI0kIGZWM67r7mYXgKrU8zyW6o= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726969AbfBFVNb (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:13:31 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:43042 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726596AbfBFVNb (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2019 16:13:31 -0500 Received: from localhost (unknown [178.226.110.48]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D934B218B0; Wed, 6 Feb 2019 21:13:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1549487611; bh=jhba+IjbWC2ez7bKxSZxQiEKCN5A718Uk3+rXrLB5Nw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=FexcrfNF+JMrNSq/NkXavJr3oQJjxIKN1xCRIvbJTAPny2etTUyPtU1Yr4JGiDmbK lpfw3gjnYc505KLdJBKnm9JPF7Ed+VpM9xgnYzSJOSU1qiT7ibsUPU515nKkS4CjcF 1Kqfs4/X2ghNbG3hUfC5BUR0pamuzDXa0W5AFSRI= Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 22:13:26 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Ben Hutchings Cc: Sasha Levin , stable , Eric Dumazet , Peter Oskolkov , Mao Wenan Subject: Re: [4.4] FragmentSmack security fixes Message-ID: <20190206211326.GA5425@kroah.com> References: <1549391183.2925.179.camel@codethink.co.uk> <20190205184105.GA22198@kroah.com> <1549395678.2925.236.camel@codethink.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1549395678.2925.236.camel@codethink.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 07:41:18PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > Peter Oskolkov checked an earlier version of this backport, but I have > > > since rebased and added another 3 commits to it.  I tested with the > > > ip_defrag.sh self-test that he added upstream, and it passed.  I have > > > included the fix that is currently queued for the 4.9, 4.14 and 4.19 > > > branches. > > > > That's a lot of patches, some of which I have already queued up in the > > next 4.4 release which will happen in a day or so.  Are they all still > > needed after the changes there are merged? > > Ah, yes, a lot of the fragment-handling changes are already in your > queue and I'm not certain that all of mine are needed. However I don't > think the changes in your queue are complete and correct. When I run > the ip_defrag.sh self-test: > > 1. The ipv4 non-overlap case fails after a few seconds, with recv() > returning an EAGAIN error. If I modify the script to continue after an > error, the other cases do pass, however. This is not a regression from > 4.4.172, but with my changes all cases pass. > > 2. There is a reference leak which prevents the new network namespaces > being cleaned up ("unregister_netdevice: waiting for lo to become free. > Usage count = 61"). With 4.4.172 or with my changes applied, the > warnings appear, but only for about a minute with the number gradually > decreasing. So this is a regression. > > 3. If I run the test again, it hangs. Shutting down the VM also hangs. > I think this is related to the previous issue. Again, this is a > regression. Ok, I dropped those patches from the 4.4 queue before releasing it. Let me go add them back for the moment and then I'll dig through all of this over the next few days and see what it looks like... thanks, greg k-h