From: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: sock: validate data_len before allocating skb in sock_alloc_send_pskb()
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 14:11:52 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FC70BA8.5060200@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120531060201.GA13158@redhat.com>
On 05/31/2012 02:02 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 02:00:14PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
>> On 05/30/2012 03:02 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Eric Dumazet<eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
>>> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 08:46:23 +0200
>>>
>>>> Why doing this test in the while (1) block, it should be done before the
>>>> loop...
>>>>
>>>> Or even in the caller, note net/unix/af_unix.c does this right.
>>>>
>>>> if (len> SKB_MAX_ALLOC)
>>>> data_len = min_t(size_t,
>>>> len - SKB_MAX_ALLOC,
>>>> MAX_SKB_FRAGS * PAGE_SIZE);
>>>>
>>>> skb = sock_alloc_send_pskb(sk, len - data_len, data_len,
>>>> msg->msg_flags& MSG_DONTWAIT,&err);
>>> My impression is that the callers should be fixed to. It makes no sense
>>> to penalize the call sites that get this right.
>>>
>>> And yes, if we do check it in sock_alloc_send_pskb() it should be done
>>> at function entry, not inside the loop.
>> Sure, so is it ok for me to send a V2 that just do the fixing in
>> sock_alloc_sned_pskb() as it's simple and easy to be accepted by
>> stable version?
>>
>> For the fix of callers, I want to post fixes on top as I find
>> there's some code duplication of {tun|macvtap|packet}_alloc_skb()
>> and I want to unify them to a common helper in sock.c. Then I can
>> fix this issue in the new helper.
> Are packet sockets really affected?
> If yes the only call site that gets this right is unix sockets?
Not affected, only code duplication. It's no harm the check the data_len
again for packet sockets, so better to unify the code and fix the issue
in one place?
>
>>> --
>>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
>>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-31 6:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-30 5:47 [PATCH] net: sock: validate data_len before allocating skb in sock_alloc_send_pskb() Jason Wang
2012-05-30 6:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-05-30 7:02 ` David Miller
2012-05-31 6:00 ` Jason Wang
2012-05-31 6:02 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2012-05-31 6:11 ` Jason Wang [this message]
2012-05-31 6:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-05-31 6:43 ` Jason Wang
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=4FC70BA8.5060200@redhat.com \
--to=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@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.