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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A18B7C433EF for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 18:01:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235133AbiGRSB3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2022 14:01:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44908 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235200AbiGRSB0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2022 14:01:26 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x433.google.com (mail-pf1-x433.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::433]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F1C42E699 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:01:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x433.google.com with SMTP id 70so11335625pfx.1 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:01:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=networkplumber-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=EPr93hzqtmEu+IYJ2GHYmVIyCRv80KC3J1ZooZISigc=; b=Enf7pYJE7MOIDwmMyEDeJQhGGNOoINnRxBUwsJTGSt44Rhhl0ecf26nJv+N79aFdl6 Hu7SkjKRFkcQBnM9SKtgSrBIcqLvPX6hggj5Yzo4Ebu/RkGtEBqiV2OyiDibbHFBsin4 32CkcrIZtMembTG68i1geFl5wvhP575dHakOI7NNRrSay2gPfQl/Xh8Bc/WklPdf7A3y 0bOY7MSZIO/pMwp+cfd0oGN4mN8ccXcKkechpc3P2qamKMg3ww5jVrpgs4gQwZGrDn9l 80qoARbbdAIocEKI00DiSW5FFxCrDbUEDQiHq/yWGaRABLcRc7KQuR9iy+f0UUDp5a5g zIzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=EPr93hzqtmEu+IYJ2GHYmVIyCRv80KC3J1ZooZISigc=; b=1kh4IeaXjI7d88RbjfRFPub8fHaosoSFs1UNc5L3X43FHW1hwIMcDRJrBPFtQiUmlr JxVDMFUQ/uxFSRHnxelCjnPSJHbJ788w0D0LppyZphhvd17eQ/ONcJyz6G4LEDAVK4s7 5YGal5bNZNl+TGlxuaEXnRLuHv0xrQR/owvCVWE1+tTNghu7JopcFTzROjkO0INB2jdC U7jlEV2xnpMrIOEoccmGT3HQA+qacqboB7QiK1uz4Iv0wREEStvJYJN4rP24GmChThUS NNoxAUpoBpr5TDt7pmVY1yXqKXynsgWttK7FMkaNNOSsixGAtkLhYCG3kvumInB+bb06 j3tQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora/UtNSinib1EPDtGiOWvao9MAxIPWfmnHtmUZDzKJC4ZzFsiCM1 nHPBId9/aOUkteBCs+FH4Xl6Wg8qYcedTg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vpeglwJ4DUAi/qfuN5ULWTHSY8zDhRICHTSc9dtyx9+vLnBM6UlSa4ACl9/XqFXjQc2imqjQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:1c6:0:b0:412:a989:34f4 with SMTP id 189-20020a6301c6000000b00412a98934f4mr26191227pgb.72.1658167284482; Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.local (204-195-120-218.wavecable.com. [204.195.120.218]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w128-20020a626286000000b005254535a2cfsm9582413pfb.136.2022.07.18.11.01.21 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:01:22 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:01:19 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Fw: [Bug 216259] New: Setting SO_OOBINLINE after receiving OOB data over TCP can cause that data to be received again Message-ID: <20220718110119.17365d11@hermes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Begin forwarded message: Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 17:34:38 +0000 From: bugzilla-daemon@kernel.org To: stephen@networkplumber.org Subject: [Bug 216259] New: Setting SO_OOBINLINE after receiving OOB data ov= er TCP can cause that data to be received again https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D216259 Bug ID: 216259 Summary: Setting SO_OOBINLINE after receiving OOB data over TCP can cause that data to be received again Product: Networking Version: 2.5 Kernel Version: 5.17.0 Hardware: All OS: Linux Tree: Mainline Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P1 Component: IPV4 Assignee: stephen@networkplumber.org Reporter: zfigura@codeweavers.com Regression: No Created attachment 301451 --> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=3D301451&action=3Dedit = =20 test program demonstrating the bug I'm not sure if this is a bug=E2=80=94I haven't fully read specs and perhap= s it's within spec for OOBINLINE or TCP or something=E2=80=94but it certainly look= s like one. The attached test program demonstrates the bug, and probably more clearly t= han any verbal description. It sends and receives a byte of OOB data over a (loopback) socket pair, sets the receiving socket to SO_OOBINLINE, and then calls recv() again (without MSG_OOB). This results in the same byte being received again. If on the other hand a recv() call is made before setting SO_OOBINLINE [gua= rded out with if(0)], the offending call does not succeed, which heightens my suspicion that this is a bug. --=20 You may reply to this email to add a comment. You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.