From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: Backport bpf: try harder on clones when writing into skb? [Commit: 3697649ff29e0f647565eed04b27a7779c646a22] Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2016 20:47:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20160705.204755.193524893150572527.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20160706021649.GA82976@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: sargun@sargun.me, netdev@vger.kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net To: alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:48002 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751271AbcGFDr6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jul 2016 23:47:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160706021649.GA82976@ast-mbp.thefacebook.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Alexei Starovoitov Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 19:16:51 -0700 > On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 08:35:18AM -0700, Sargun Dhillon wrote: >> Does it make sense to backport >> 3697649ff29e0f647565eed04b27a7779c646a22 from 4.6 to the longterm >> (4.4) release? I can trivially recreate the issue represented by >> 3697649ff29e0f647565eed04b27a7779c646a22 by attaching a eBPF filter >> that clones an ingress ICMP packet, and then tries to set the >> destination MAC address. >> >> It seems like the patch applies cleanly to 4.4. I cherry-picked it, >> and rebuilt my kernel, and at least in the trivial test case passes. > > Makes sense to me, especially since it's lts. > Daniel, thoughts? I'll queued this up for 4.4 -stable.