From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: dhowells@redhat.com
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org,
horms@kernel.org, alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com, davem@davemloft.net,
marc.dionne@auristor.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
security@1seal.org, stable@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
anderson@allelesecurity.com, jaltman@auristor.com,
edumazet@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/5] rxrpc: Fix use of wrong skb when comparing queued RESP challenge serial
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2026 18:45:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260321014543.3892478-2-kuba@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260319150150.4189381-3-dhowells@redhat.com>
Hi David!
The review under --- is AI generated. It looks legit to me.
The Google reviewer also points out preexiting problems that may be worth looking at:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260319150150.4189381-1-dhowells%40redhat.com
For local reproduction steps see https://netdev-ai.bots.linux.dev/ai-local.html
---
rxrpc: Fix use of wrong skb when comparing queued RESP challenge serial
In rxrpc_post_response(), the code should be comparing the challenge
serial number from the cached response before deciding to switch to a
newer response, but looks at the newer packet private data instead,
rendering the comparison always false.
Fix this by switching to look at the older packet.
> diff --git a/net/rxrpc/conn_event.c b/net/rxrpc/conn_event.c
> index 98ad9b51ca2c..2c27f47951f9 100644
> --- a/net/rxrpc/conn_event.c
> +++ b/net/rxrpc/conn_event.c
> @@ -557,7 +557,7 @@ void rxrpc_post_response(struct rxrpc_connection *conn, struct sk_buff *skb)
> spin_lock_irq(&local->lock);
> old = conn->tx_response;
> if (old) {
> - struct rxrpc_skb_priv *osp = rxrpc_skb(skb);
> + struct rxrpc_skb_priv *osp = rxrpc_skb(old);
>
> /* Always go with the response to the most recent challenge. */
> if (after(sp->resp.challenge_serial, osp->resp.challenge_serial))
> conn->tx_response = old;
^^^^
Does this have the logic inverted? The comment says "Always go with
the response to the most recent challenge" and the condition checks
if the new response has a more recent serial number:
if (after(sp->resp.challenge_serial, osp->resp.challenge_serial))
When this is TRUE (new serial is after old serial), the code keeps
the OLD response by setting conn->tx_response = old. Shouldn't it
keep the NEW response instead? Something like:
if (after(sp->resp.challenge_serial, osp->resp.challenge_serial))
conn->tx_response = skb;
This would cause the connection to respond to outdated challenges
rather than the most recent one.
> else
> old = skb;
When a new response is rejected here (because the old response has a
more recent challenge serial), what happens to the rejected packet?
The function assigns it to the local variable 'old' but never frees
it.
Looking at the callers:
- rxkad_respond_to_challenge() in rxkad.c sets response = NULL after
calling this function
- rxgk_construct_response() in rxgk.c does the same
This suggests ownership transfers to rxrpc_post_response(). Should
the rejected packet be freed with rxrpc_free_skb() before returning?
> } else {
> conn->tx_response = skb;
> }
> spin_unlock_irq(&local->lock);
> rxrpc_poke_conn(conn, rxrpc_conn_get_poke_response);
> }
--
pw-bot: cr
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-21 1:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-19 15:01 [PATCH net 0/5] rxrpc: Miscellaneous fixes David Howells
2026-03-19 15:01 ` [PATCH net 1/5] rxrpc: Fix RxGK token loading to check bounds David Howells
2026-03-19 15:01 ` [PATCH net 2/5] rxrpc: Fix use of wrong skb when comparing queued RESP challenge serial David Howells
2026-03-21 1:45 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2026-03-21 8:15 ` David Howells
2026-03-23 21:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-23 21:51 ` David Howells
2026-03-23 22:11 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-03-19 15:01 ` [PATCH net 3/5] rxrpc: Fix rack timer warning to report unexpected mode David Howells
2026-03-19 15:01 ` [PATCH net 4/5] rxrpc: Fix keyring reference count leak in rxrpc_setsockopt() David Howells
2026-03-19 15:01 ` [PATCH net 5/5] rxrpc: Fix key reference count leak from call->key David Howells
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=20260321014543.3892478-2-kuba@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com \
--cc=anderson@allelesecurity.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jaltman@auristor.com \
--cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marc.dionne@auristor.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=security@1seal.org \
--cc=stable@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