From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3.8-rc] tuntap: refuse to re-attach to different tun_struct
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2013 12:53:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130110115312.GC30885@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130110102319.GB13451@redhat.com>
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 12:23:19PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 08:59:48AM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > Multiqueue tun devices support detaching a tun_file from its tun_struct
> > and re-attaching at a later point in time. This allows users to disable
> > a specific queue temporarily.
> >
> > ioctl(TUNSETIFF) allows the user to specify the network interface to
> > attach by name. This means the user can attempt to attach to interface
> > "B" after detaching from interface "A".
> >
> > The driver is not designed to support this so check we are re-attaching
> > to the right tun_struct. Failure to do so may lead to oops.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > This fix is for 3.8-rc.
> >
> > drivers/net/tun.c | 2 ++
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
> > index fbd106e..cf6da6e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
> > @@ -491,6 +491,8 @@ static int tun_attach(struct tun_struct *tun, struct file *file)
> > err = -EINVAL;
> > if (rcu_dereference_protected(tfile->tun, lockdep_rtnl_is_held()))
> > goto out;
> > + if (tfile->detached && tun != tfile->detached)
> > + goto out;
> >
> > err = -EBUSY;
> > if (!(tun->flags & TUN_TAP_MQ) && tun->numqueues == 1)
> > --
> > 1.8.0.2
>
>
> I agree this is a bug but even with this patch, we still allow:
>
> SETIFF
> SETQUEUE (DISABLED)
> SETIFF
>
> Originally the rule always was that repeated setiff calls fail with
> EINVAL. We broke that when we set tun to NULL. It's probably worth
> preserving that, even if queue is disabled. Applying something like the below
> instead will address this concern, won't it?
Sounds good.
Stefan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-10 11:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-10 7:59 [PATCH 3.8-rc] tuntap: refuse to re-attach to different tun_struct Stefan Hajnoczi
2013-01-10 9:25 ` Jason Wang
2013-01-10 10:23 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-01-10 10:43 ` Jason Wang
2013-01-10 11:07 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-01-10 13:53 ` Jason Wang
2013-01-10 11:53 ` Stefan Hajnoczi [this message]
2013-01-10 22:39 ` David Miller
2013-01-11 1:29 ` Jason Wang
2013-01-11 5:12 ` David Miller
2013-01-11 8:38 ` 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=20130110115312.GC30885@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com \
--to=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).