All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
	<netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 14/15] xfrm: fix a warning in xfrm_policy_insert_list
Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 13:04:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200529110408.6349-15-steffen.klassert@secunet.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200529110408.6349-1-steffen.klassert@secunet.com>

From: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>

This waring can be triggered simply by:

  # ip xfrm policy update src 192.168.1.1/24 dst 192.168.1.2/24 dir in \
    priority 1 mark 0 mask 0x10  #[1]
  # ip xfrm policy update src 192.168.1.1/24 dst 192.168.1.2/24 dir in \
    priority 2 mark 0 mask 0x1   #[2]
  # ip xfrm policy update src 192.168.1.1/24 dst 192.168.1.2/24 dir in \
    priority 2 mark 0 mask 0x10  #[3]

Then dmesg shows:

  [ ] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 7265 at net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1548
  [ ] RIP: 0010:xfrm_policy_insert_list+0x2f2/0x1030
  [ ] Call Trace:
  [ ]  xfrm_policy_inexact_insert+0x85/0xe50
  [ ]  xfrm_policy_insert+0x4ba/0x680
  [ ]  xfrm_add_policy+0x246/0x4d0
  [ ]  xfrm_user_rcv_msg+0x331/0x5c0
  [ ]  netlink_rcv_skb+0x121/0x350
  [ ]  xfrm_netlink_rcv+0x66/0x80
  [ ]  netlink_unicast+0x439/0x630
  [ ]  netlink_sendmsg+0x714/0xbf0
  [ ]  sock_sendmsg+0xe2/0x110

The issue was introduced by Commit 7cb8a93968e3 ("xfrm: Allow inserting
policies with matching mark and different priorities"). After that, the
policies [1] and [2] would be able to be added with different priorities.

However, policy [3] will actually match both [1] and [2]. Policy [1]
was matched due to the 1st 'return true' in xfrm_policy_mark_match(),
and policy [2] was matched due to the 2nd 'return true' in there. It
caused WARN_ON() in xfrm_policy_insert_list().

This patch is to fix it by only (the same value and priority) as the
same policy in xfrm_policy_mark_match().

Thanks to Yuehaibing, we could make this fix better.

v1->v2:
  - check policy->mark.v == pol->mark.v only without mask.

Fixes: 7cb8a93968e3 ("xfrm: Allow inserting policies with matching mark and different priorities")
Reported-by: Xiumei Mu <xmu@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
---
 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 7 +------
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
index 297b2fdb3c29..564aa6492e7c 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
@@ -1436,12 +1436,7 @@ static void xfrm_policy_requeue(struct xfrm_policy *old,
 static bool xfrm_policy_mark_match(struct xfrm_policy *policy,
 				   struct xfrm_policy *pol)
 {
-	u32 mark = policy->mark.v & policy->mark.m;
-
-	if (policy->mark.v == pol->mark.v && policy->mark.m == pol->mark.m)
-		return true;
-
-	if ((mark & pol->mark.m) == pol->mark.v &&
+	if (policy->mark.v == pol->mark.v &&
 	    policy->priority == pol->priority)
 		return true;
 
-- 
2.17.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-05-29 11:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-29 11:03 pull request (net): ipsec 2020-05-29 Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:03 ` [PATCH 01/15] xfrm: allow to accept packets with ipv6 NEXTHDR_HOP in xfrm_input Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:03 ` [PATCH 02/15] xfrm: do pskb_pull properly in __xfrm_transport_prep Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:03 ` [PATCH 03/15] esp6: get the right proto for transport mode in esp6_gso_encap Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:03 ` [PATCH 04/15] xfrm: remove the xfrm_state_put call becofe going to out_reset Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:03 ` [PATCH 05/15] xfrm: fix error in comment Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:03 ` [PATCH 06/15] xfrm: espintcp: save and call old ->sk_destruct Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:04 ` [PATCH 07/15] esp6: support ipv6 nexthdrs process for beet gso segment Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:04 ` [PATCH 08/15] esp4: " Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:04 ` [PATCH 09/15] xfrm: call xfrm_output_gso when inner_protocol is set in xfrm_output Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:04 ` [PATCH 10/15] ip_vti: receive ipip packet by calling ip_tunnel_rcv Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:04 ` [PATCH 11/15] xfrm interface: fix oops when deleting a x-netns interface Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:04 ` [PATCH 12/15] esp6: calculate transport_header correctly when sel.family != AF_INET6 Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:04 ` [PATCH 13/15] esp4: improve xfrm4_beet_gso_segment() to be more readable Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 11:04 ` Steffen Klassert [this message]
2020-05-29 11:04 ` [PATCH 15/15] xfrm: fix a NULL-ptr deref in xfrm_local_error Steffen Klassert
2020-05-29 20:06 ` pull request (net): ipsec 2020-05-29 David Miller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200529110408.6349-15-steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
    --to=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.