[BUG,NETFILTER] nfqnl_mangle() not requesting enough space for bigger reinjected packet.

[BUG,NETFILTER] nfqnl_mangle() not requesting enough space for bigger reinjected packet.

[Arnaud Ebalard]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3208 bytes --]

Hi,

While reinjecting *bigger* modified versions of IPv6 packets using
libnetfilter_queue, things work fine on a 2.6.24 kernel (2.6.22 too)
but I get the following on recents kernels (2.6.25, trace below is
against today's net-2.6 git tree):

skb_over_panic: text:c04fddb0 len:696 put:632 head:f7592c00 data:f7592c00 tail:0xf7592eb8 end:0xf7592e80 dev:eth0
------------[ cut here ]------------
invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT 
Process sendd (pid: 3657, ti=f6014000 task=f77c31d0 task.ti=f6014000)
Stack: c071e638 c04fddb0 000002b8 00000278 f7592c00 f7592c00 f7592eb8 f7592e80 
       f763c000 f6bc5200 f7592c40 f6015c34 c04cdbfc f6bc5200 00000278 f6015c60 
       c04fddb0 00000020 f72a10c0 f751b420 00000001 0000000a 000002b8 c065582c 
Call Trace:
 [<c04fddb0>] ? nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x1c0/0x2e0
 [<c04cdbfc>] ? skb_put+0x3c/0x40
 [<c04fddb0>] ? nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x1c0/0x2e0
 [<c04fd115>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0xf5/0x160
 [<c04fd03e>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x1e/0x160
 [<c04fd020>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x0/0x160
 [<c04f8ed7>] ? netlink_rcv_skb+0x77/0xa0
 [<c04fcefc>] ? nfnetlink_rcv+0x1c/0x30
 [<c04f8c73>] ? netlink_unicast+0x243/0x2b0
 [<c04cfaba>] ? memcpy_fromiovec+0x4a/0x70
 [<c04f9406>] ? netlink_sendmsg+0x1c6/0x270
 [<c04c8244>] ? sock_sendmsg+0xc4/0xf0
 [<c011970d>] ? set_next_entity+0x1d/0x50
 [<c0133a80>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40
 [<c0118f9e>] ? __wake_up_common+0x3e/0x70
 [<c0342fbf>] ? n_tty_receive_buf+0x34f/0x1280
 [<c011d308>] ? __wake_up+0x68/0x70
 [<c02cea47>] ? copy_from_user+0x37/0x70
 [<c04cfd7c>] ? verify_iovec+0x2c/0x90
 [<c04c837a>] ? sys_sendmsg+0x10a/0x230
 [<c011967a>] ? __dequeue_entity+0x2a/0xa0
 [<c011970d>] ? set_next_entity+0x1d/0x50
 [<c0345397>] ? pty_write+0x47/0x60
 [<c033d59b>] ? tty_default_put_char+0x1b/0x20
 [<c011d2e9>] ? __wake_up+0x49/0x70
 [<c033df99>] ? tty_ldisc_deref+0x39/0x90
 [<c033ff20>] ? tty_write+0x1a0/0x1b0
 [<c04c93af>] ? sys_socketcall+0x7f/0x260
 [<c0102ff9>] ? sysenter_past_esp+0x6a/0x91
 [<c05f0000>] ? snd_intel8x0m_probe+0x270/0x6e0
 =======================
Code: 00 00 89 5c 24 14 8b 98 9c 00 00 00 89 54 24 0c 89 5c 24 10 8b 40 50 89 4c 24 04 c7 04 24 38 e6 71 c0 89 44 24 08 e8 c4 46 c5 ff <0f> 0b eb fe 55 89 e5 56 89 d6 53 89 c3 83 ec 0c 8b 40 50 39 d0 
EIP: [<c04ccdfc>] skb_over_panic+0x5c/0x60 SS:ESP 0068:f6015bf8


Looking at the code, I ended up in nfq_mangle() function (called by
nfqnl_recv_verdict()) which performs a call to skb_copy_expand() due to
the increased size of data passed to the function. AFAICT, it should ask
for 'diff' instead of 'diff - skb_tailroom(e->skb)'. Because the
resulting sk_buff has not enough space to support the skb_put(skb, diff)
call a few lines later, this results in the call to skb_over_panic().

The patch below asks for allocation of a copy with enough space for
mangled packet and the same amount of headroom as old sk_buff. While
looking at how the regression appeared (e2b58a67), I noticed the same
pattern in ipq_mangle_ipv6() and ipq_mangle_ipv4(). The patch corrects
those locations too.

Tested with bigger reinjected IPv6 packets (nfqnl_mangle() path), things
are ok (2.6.25 and today's net-2.6 git tree).

Don't hesitate if I missed something.

Cheers,

a+


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: bad_argument_to_skb_copy_expand_in_nfqnl_mangle.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 2002 bytes --]

Signed-off-by: Arnaud Ebalard <arno@natisbad.org>

diff --git a/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_queue.c b/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_queue.c
index 719be29..26a37ce 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_queue.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_queue.c
@@ -296,9 +296,8 @@ ipq_mangle_ipv4(ipq_verdict_msg_t *v, struct nf_queue_entry *e)
 		if (v->data_len > 0xFFFF)
 			return -EINVAL;
 		if (diff > skb_tailroom(e->skb)) {
-			nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,
-					       diff - skb_tailroom(e->skb),
-					       GFP_ATOMIC);
+			nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, skb_headroom(e->skb),
+					       diff, GFP_ATOMIC);
 			if (!nskb) {
 				printk(KERN_WARNING "ip_queue: error "
 				      "in mangle, dropping packet\n");
diff --git a/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_queue.c b/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_queue.c
index 92a36c9..2eff3ae 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_queue.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_queue.c
@@ -298,9 +298,8 @@ ipq_mangle_ipv6(ipq_verdict_msg_t *v, struct nf_queue_entry *e)
 		if (v->data_len > 0xFFFF)
 			return -EINVAL;
 		if (diff > skb_tailroom(e->skb)) {
-			nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,
-					       diff - skb_tailroom(e->skb),
-					       GFP_ATOMIC);
+			nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, skb_headroom(e->skb),
+					       diff, GFP_ATOMIC);
 			if (!nskb) {
 				printk(KERN_WARNING "ip6_queue: OOM "
 				      "in mangle, dropping packet\n");
diff --git a/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c b/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c
index 2c9fe5c..3447025 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.c
@@ -454,9 +454,8 @@ nfqnl_mangle(void *data, int data_len, struct nf_queue_entry *e)
 		if (data_len > 0xFFFF)
 			return -EINVAL;
 		if (diff > skb_tailroom(e->skb)) {
-			nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,
-					       diff - skb_tailroom(e->skb),
-					       GFP_ATOMIC);
+			nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, skb_headroom(e->skb),
+					       diff, GFP_ATOMIC);
 			if (!nskb) {
 				printk(KERN_WARNING "nf_queue: OOM "
 				      "in mangle, dropping packet\n");

Re: [BUG,NETFILTER] nfqnl_mangle() not requesting enough space for bigger reinjected packet.

[Silviu Vlasceanu]

Arnaud Ebalard <arno <at> natisbad.org> writes:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> While reinjecting *bigger* modified versions of IPv6 packets using
> libnetfilter_queue, things work fine on a 2.6.24 kernel (2.6.22 too)
> but I get the following on recents kernels (2.6.25, trace below is
> against today's net-2.6 git tree):
> 
> skb_over_panic: text:c04fddb0 len:696 put:632 head:f7592c00 data:f7592c00
tail:0xf7592eb8
> end:0xf7592e80 dev:eth0
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT 
> Process sendd (pid: 3657, ti=f6014000 task=f77c31d0 task.ti=f6014000)
> Stack: c071e638 c04fddb0 000002b8 00000278 f7592c00 f7592c00 f7592eb8 f7592e80 
>        f763c000 f6bc5200 f7592c40 f6015c34 c04cdbfc f6bc5200 00000278 f6015c60 
>        c04fddb0 00000020 f72a10c0 f751b420 00000001 0000000a 000002b8 c065582c 
> Call Trace:
>  [<c04fddb0>] ? nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x1c0/0x2e0
>  [<c04cdbfc>] ? skb_put+0x3c/0x40
>  [<c04fddb0>] ? nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x1c0/0x2e0
>  [<c04fd115>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0xf5/0x160
>  [<c04fd03e>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x1e/0x160
>  [<c04fd020>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x0/0x160
>  [<c04f8ed7>] ? netlink_rcv_skb+0x77/0xa0
>  [<c04fcefc>] ? nfnetlink_rcv+0x1c/0x30
>  [<c04f8c73>] ? netlink_unicast+0x243/0x2b0
>  [<c04cfaba>] ? memcpy_fromiovec+0x4a/0x70
>  [<c04f9406>] ? netlink_sendmsg+0x1c6/0x270
>  [<c04c8244>] ? sock_sendmsg+0xc4/0xf0
>  [<c011970d>] ? set_next_entity+0x1d/0x50
>  [<c0133a80>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40
>  [<c0118f9e>] ? __wake_up_common+0x3e/0x70
>  [<c0342fbf>] ? n_tty_receive_buf+0x34f/0x1280
>  [<c011d308>] ? __wake_up+0x68/0x70
>  [<c02cea47>] ? copy_from_user+0x37/0x70
>  [<c04cfd7c>] ? verify_iovec+0x2c/0x90
>  [<c04c837a>] ? sys_sendmsg+0x10a/0x230
>  [<c011967a>] ? __dequeue_entity+0x2a/0xa0
>  [<c011970d>] ? set_next_entity+0x1d/0x50
>  [<c0345397>] ? pty_write+0x47/0x60
>  [<c033d59b>] ? tty_default_put_char+0x1b/0x20
>  [<c011d2e9>] ? __wake_up+0x49/0x70
>  [<c033df99>] ? tty_ldisc_deref+0x39/0x90
>  [<c033ff20>] ? tty_write+0x1a0/0x1b0
>  [<c04c93af>] ? sys_socketcall+0x7f/0x260
>  [<c0102ff9>] ? sysenter_past_esp+0x6a/0x91
>  [<c05f0000>] ? snd_intel8x0m_probe+0x270/0x6e0
>  =======================
> Code: 00 00 89 5c 24 14 8b 98 9c 00 00 00 89 54 24 0c 89 5c 24 10 8b 40 50 89
4c 24 04 c7 04 24 38 e6 71 c0 89 44 24 08 e8 c4 46 c5
> ff <0f> 0b eb fe 55 89 e5 56 89 d6 53 89 c3 83 ec 0c 8b 40 50 39 d0 
> EIP: [<c04ccdfc>] skb_over_panic+0x5c/0x60 SS:ESP 0068:f6015bf8
> 
> Looking at the code, I ended up in nfq_mangle() function (called by
> nfqnl_recv_verdict()) which performs a call to skb_copy_expand() due to
> the increased size of data passed to the function. AFAICT, it should ask
> for 'diff' instead of 'diff - skb_tailroom(e->skb)'. Because the
> resulting sk_buff has not enough space to support the skb_put(skb, diff)
> call a few lines later, this results in the call to skb_over_panic().
> 
> The patch below asks for allocation of a copy with enough space for
> mangled packet and the same amount of headroom as old sk_buff. While
> looking at how the regression appeared (e2b58a67), I noticed the same
> pattern in ipq_mangle_ipv6() and ipq_mangle_ipv4(). The patch corrects
> those locations too.
> 
> Tested with bigger reinjected IPv6 packets (nfqnl_mangle() path), things
> are ok (2.6.25 and today's net-2.6 git tree).
> 
> Don't hesitate if I missed something.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> a+
> 
> 
> Attachment (bad_argument_to_skb_copy_expand_in_nfqnl_mangle.patch):
text/x-diff, 2002 bytes

Hello,

I have tried sendd on 2.6.24-1 and there still seems to be a problem with it:

ip6_tables: (C) 2000-2006 Netfilter Core Team
Netfilter messages via NETLINK v0.30.
skb_over_panic: text:e01fcb93 len:432 put:368 head:de406c00 data:de406c00
tail:0xde406db0 end:0xde406d20 dev:eth0
------------[ cut here ]------------
kernel BUG at net/core/skbuff.c:95!
invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
Modules linked in: nfnetlink_queue nfnetlink xt_NFQUEUE ip6table_filter
ip6_tables x_tables ppdev lp ac battery ipv6 fuse dm_snapshot dm_mirror dm_mod
loop snd_intel8x0 snd_ac97_codec ac97_bus snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm
snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq
parport_pc parport snd_timer snd_seq_device serio_raw snd soundcore psmouse
snd_page_alloc pcspkr iTCO_wdt rtc i2c_i801 i2c_core shpchp pci_hotplug button
intel_agp agpgart evdev ext3 jbd mbcache ide_cd cdrom ide_disk generic usbhid
hid piix ide_core floppy ata_generic e1000 ehci_hcd uhci_hcd libata scsi_mod
usbcore thermal processor fan

Pid: 2265, comm: sendd Not tainted (2.6.24-1-686 #1)
EIP: 0060:[<c0258a2d>] EFLAGS: 00210296 CPU: 0
EIP is at skb_over_panic+0x59/0x5d
EAX: 00000075 EBX: de406c00 ECX: 00200082 EDX: 00200000
ESI: ddb43000 EDI: dd832280 EBP: ded71b80 ESP: ded6fc28
 DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0068
Process sendd (pid: 2265, ti=ded6e000 task=ded05250 task.ti=ded6e000)
Stack: c032814b e01fcb93 000001b0 00000170 de406c00 de406c00 de406db0 de406d20
       ddb43000 000001b0 00000170 e01fcb98 00000020 ddffdc20 dda4d180 00000001
       e01fcf8c e01fcf80 0000000c ded6fce0 e02f820c ded6fc90 e01fcfc0 ffffffff
Call Trace:
 [<e01fcb93>] nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x181/0x20e [nfnetlink_queue]
 [<e01fcb98>] nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x186/0x20e [nfnetlink_queue]
 [<e02f820c>] nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x114/0x154 [nfnetlink]
 [<e02f80f8>] nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x0/0x154 [nfnetlink]
 [<c0272f0d>] netlink_rcv_skb+0x2d/0x7e
 [<e02f8019>] nfnetlink_rcv+0x19/0x24 [nfnetlink]
 [<c0272cf4>] netlink_unicast+0x199/0x1f4
 [<c02734ec>] netlink_sendmsg+0x27c/0x288
 [<c0225db7>] __add_entropy_words+0x58/0x176
 [<c02549fb>] sock_sendmsg+0xc9/0xe4
 [<c01353f9>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x35
 [<c0254ba8>] sys_sendmsg+0x192/0x1f7
 [<c016615f>] __do_fault+0x32b/0x36c
 [<c013abdc>] clocksource_get_next+0x39/0x3f
 [<c0139c51>] update_wall_time+0x541/0x6a5
 [<c01680e5>] handle_mm_fault+0x2cf/0x685
 [<c0115944>] lapic_next_event+0xc/0x10
 [<c013c08d>] clockevents_program_event+0xe0/0xee
 [<c012c6a2>] lock_timer_base+0x19/0x35
 [<c012c7b6>] __mod_timer+0x9a/0xa4
 [<c0255e01>] sys_socketcall+0x240/0x261
 [<c0129294>] irq_exit+0x53/0x6b
 [<c0115e6c>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x71/0x7d
 [<c0103e5e>] sysenter_past_esp+0x6b/0xa1
 =======================
Code: 00 00 89 5c 24 14 8b 98 a0 00 00 00 89 54 24 0c 89 5c 24 10 8b 40 50 89 4c
24 04 c7 04 24 4b 81 32 c0 89 44 24 08 e8 75 c7 ec ff <0f> 0b eb fe 56 89 d6 53
89 c3 83 ec 0c 8b 40 50 39 c2 76 04 0f
EIP: [<c0258a2d>] skb_over_panic+0x59/0x5d SS:ESP 0068:ded6fc28
---[ end trace 012d67e9de71128b ]---
[drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810
sid:~# uname -r
2.6.24-1-686

I have't patched yet my 2.6.25 kernel with the patch you provided, so I have
tried sendd on 2.6.24-1, as you said there are no problems with it (sendd
installed via the .deb packages you uploaded on rfc. ...

Do you have idea of what could be causing this?

Thanks,

Silviu

Re: [BUG,NETFILTER] nfqnl_mangle() not requesting enough space for bigger reinjected packet.

[Patrick McHardy]

Silviu Vlasceanu wrote:
> Arnaud Ebalard <arno <at> natisbad.org> writes:
>
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> While reinjecting *bigger* modified versions of IPv6 packets using
>> libnetfilter_queue, things work fine on a 2.6.24 kernel (2.6.22 too)
>> but I get the following on recents kernels (2.6.25, trace below is
>> against today's net-2.6 git tree):
>>
>> skb_over_panic: text:c04fddb0 len:696 put:632 head:f7592c00 data:f7592c00
>>     
> tail:0xf7592eb8
>   
>> end:0xf7592e80 dev:eth0
>> ------------[ cut here ]------------
>> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT 
>> Process sendd (pid: 3657, ti=f6014000 task=f77c31d0 task.ti=f6014000)
>> Stack: c071e638 c04fddb0 000002b8 00000278 f7592c00 f7592c00 f7592eb8 f7592e80 
>>        f763c000 f6bc5200 f7592c40 f6015c34 c04cdbfc f6bc5200 00000278 f6015c60 
>>        c04fddb0 00000020 f72a10c0 f751b420 00000001 0000000a 000002b8 c065582c 
>> Call Trace:
>>  [<c04fddb0>] ? nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x1c0/0x2e0
>>  [<c04cdbfc>] ? skb_put+0x3c/0x40
>>  [<c04fddb0>] ? nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x1c0/0x2e0
>>  [<c04fd115>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0xf5/0x160
>>  [<c04fd03e>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x1e/0x160
>>  [<c04fd020>] ? nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x0/0x160
>>  [<c04f8ed7>] ? netlink_rcv_skb+0x77/0xa0
>>  [<c04fcefc>] ? nfnetlink_rcv+0x1c/0x30
>>  [<c04f8c73>] ? netlink_unicast+0x243/0x2b0
>>  [<c04cfaba>] ? memcpy_fromiovec+0x4a/0x70
>>  [<c04f9406>] ? netlink_sendmsg+0x1c6/0x270
>>  [<c04c8244>] ? sock_sendmsg+0xc4/0xf0
>>  [<c011970d>] ? set_next_entity+0x1d/0x50
>>  [<c0133a80>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40
>>  [<c0118f9e>] ? __wake_up_common+0x3e/0x70
>>  [<c0342fbf>] ? n_tty_receive_buf+0x34f/0x1280
>>  [<c011d308>] ? __wake_up+0x68/0x70
>>  [<c02cea47>] ? copy_from_user+0x37/0x70
>>  [<c04cfd7c>] ? verify_iovec+0x2c/0x90
>>  [<c04c837a>] ? sys_sendmsg+0x10a/0x230
>>  [<c011967a>] ? __dequeue_entity+0x2a/0xa0
>>  [<c011970d>] ? set_next_entity+0x1d/0x50
>>  [<c0345397>] ? pty_write+0x47/0x60
>>  [<c033d59b>] ? tty_default_put_char+0x1b/0x20
>>  [<c011d2e9>] ? __wake_up+0x49/0x70
>>  [<c033df99>] ? tty_ldisc_deref+0x39/0x90
>>  [<c033ff20>] ? tty_write+0x1a0/0x1b0
>>  [<c04c93af>] ? sys_socketcall+0x7f/0x260
>>  [<c0102ff9>] ? sysenter_past_esp+0x6a/0x91
>>  [<c05f0000>] ? snd_intel8x0m_probe+0x270/0x6e0
>>  =======================
>> Code: 00 00 89 5c 24 14 8b 98 9c 00 00 00 89 54 24 0c 89 5c 24 10 8b 40 50 89
>>     
> 4c 24 04 c7 04 24 38 e6 71 c0 89 44 24 08 e8 c4 46 c5
>   
>> ff <0f> 0b eb fe 55 89 e5 56 89 d6 53 89 c3 83 ec 0c 8b 40 50 39 d0 
>> EIP: [<c04ccdfc>] skb_over_panic+0x5c/0x60 SS:ESP 0068:f6015bf8
>>
>> Looking at the code, I ended up in nfq_mangle() function (called by
>> nfqnl_recv_verdict()) which performs a call to skb_copy_expand() due to
>> the increased size of data passed to the function. AFAICT, it should ask
>> for 'diff' instead of 'diff - skb_tailroom(e->skb)'. Because the
>> resulting sk_buff has not enough space to support the skb_put(skb, diff)
>> call a few lines later, this results in the call to skb_over_panic().
>>
>> The patch below asks for allocation of a copy with enough space for
>> mangled packet and the same amount of headroom as old sk_buff. While
>> looking at how the regression appeared (e2b58a67), I noticed the same
>> pattern in ipq_mangle_ipv6() and ipq_mangle_ipv4(). The patch corrects
>> those locations too.
>>
>> Tested with bigger reinjected IPv6 packets (nfqnl_mangle() path), things
>> are ok (2.6.25 and today's net-2.6 git tree).
>>
>> Don't hesitate if I missed something.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> a+
>>
>>
>> Attachment (bad_argument_to_skb_copy_expand_in_nfqnl_mangle.patch):
>>     
> text/x-diff, 2002 bytes
>
> Hello,
>
> I have tried sendd on 2.6.24-1 and there still seems to be a problem with it:
>
> ip6_tables: (C) 2000-2006 Netfilter Core Team
> Netfilter messages via NETLINK v0.30.
> skb_over_panic: text:e01fcb93 len:432 put:368 head:de406c00 data:de406c00
> tail:0xde406db0 end:0xde406d20 dev:eth0
> ------------[ cut here ]------------
> kernel BUG at net/core/skbuff.c:95!
> invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] SMP
> Modules linked in: nfnetlink_queue nfnetlink xt_NFQUEUE ip6table_filter
> ip6_tables x_tables ppdev lp ac battery ipv6 fuse dm_snapshot dm_mirror dm_mod
> loop snd_intel8x0 snd_ac97_codec ac97_bus snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm
> snd_seq_dummy snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi snd_seq_midi_event snd_seq
> parport_pc parport snd_timer snd_seq_device serio_raw snd soundcore psmouse
> snd_page_alloc pcspkr iTCO_wdt rtc i2c_i801 i2c_core shpchp pci_hotplug button
> intel_agp agpgart evdev ext3 jbd mbcache ide_cd cdrom ide_disk generic usbhid
> hid piix ide_core floppy ata_generic e1000 ehci_hcd uhci_hcd libata scsi_mod
> usbcore thermal processor fan
>
> Pid: 2265, comm: sendd Not tainted (2.6.24-1-686 #1)
> EIP: 0060:[<c0258a2d>] EFLAGS: 00210296 CPU: 0
> EIP is at skb_over_panic+0x59/0x5d
> EAX: 00000075 EBX: de406c00 ECX: 00200082 EDX: 00200000
> ESI: ddb43000 EDI: dd832280 EBP: ded71b80 ESP: ded6fc28
>  DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0068
> Process sendd (pid: 2265, ti=ded6e000 task=ded05250 task.ti=ded6e000)
> Stack: c032814b e01fcb93 000001b0 00000170 de406c00 de406c00 de406db0 de406d20
>        ddb43000 000001b0 00000170 e01fcb98 00000020 ddffdc20 dda4d180 00000001
>        e01fcf8c e01fcf80 0000000c ded6fce0 e02f820c ded6fc90 e01fcfc0 ffffffff
> Call Trace:
>  [<e01fcb93>] nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x181/0x20e [nfnetlink_queue]
>  [<e01fcb98>] nfqnl_recv_verdict+0x186/0x20e [nfnetlink_queue]
>  [<e02f820c>] nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x114/0x154 [nfnetlink]
>  [<e02f80f8>] nfnetlink_rcv_msg+0x0/0x154 [nfnetlink]
>  [<c0272f0d>] netlink_rcv_skb+0x2d/0x7e
>  [<e02f8019>] nfnetlink_rcv+0x19/0x24 [nfnetlink]
>  [<c0272cf4>] netlink_unicast+0x199/0x1f4
>  [<c02734ec>] netlink_sendmsg+0x27c/0x288
>  [<c0225db7>] __add_entropy_words+0x58/0x176
>  [<c02549fb>] sock_sendmsg+0xc9/0xe4
>  [<c01353f9>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x35
>  [<c0254ba8>] sys_sendmsg+0x192/0x1f7
>  [<c016615f>] __do_fault+0x32b/0x36c
>  [<c013abdc>] clocksource_get_next+0x39/0x3f
>  [<c0139c51>] update_wall_time+0x541/0x6a5
>  [<c01680e5>] handle_mm_fault+0x2cf/0x685
>  [<c0115944>] lapic_next_event+0xc/0x10
>  [<c013c08d>] clockevents_program_event+0xe0/0xee
>  [<c012c6a2>] lock_timer_base+0x19/0x35
>  [<c012c7b6>] __mod_timer+0x9a/0xa4
>  [<c0255e01>] sys_socketcall+0x240/0x261
>  [<c0129294>] irq_exit+0x53/0x6b
>  [<c0115e6c>] smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x71/0x7d
>  [<c0103e5e>] sysenter_past_esp+0x6b/0xa1
>  =======================
> Code: 00 00 89 5c 24 14 8b 98 a0 00 00 00 89 54 24 0c 89 5c 24 10 8b 40 50 89 4c
> 24 04 c7 04 24 4b 81 32 c0 89 44 24 08 e8 75 c7 ec ff <0f> 0b eb fe 56 89 d6 53
> 89 c3 83 ec 0c 8b 40 50 39 c2 76 04 0f
> EIP: [<c0258a2d>] skb_over_panic+0x59/0x5d SS:ESP 0068:ded6fc28
> ---[ end trace 012d67e9de71128b ]---
> [drm] Initialized drm 1.1.0 20060810
> sid:~# uname -r
> 2.6.24-1-686
>
> I have't patched yet my 2.6.25 kernel with the patch you provided, so I have
> tried sendd on 2.6.24-1, as you said there are no problems with it (sendd
> installed via the .deb packages you uploaded on rfc. ...
>
> Do you have idea of what could be causing this?

Could send me the code your using for testing? I want to make sure
we've really fixed it this time ...

Re: [BUG,NETFILTER] nfqnl_mangle() not requesting enough space for bigger reinjected packet.

[Arnaud Ebalard]

Hi,

Sorry for the latency.

I think I just found why the 2.6.24 *Debian* kernel undergo the same
issue. Basically because 2.6.24.4 kernel are also affected. Debian
maintainers do apply during the build the patch switching to the use of
skb_copy_expand() instead of pskb_expand_head() (as part of 2.6.24.4
patch) ;-) :

$:/tmp/linux-2.6-2.6.24/debian/patches$ grep -R _expand .
./features/all/vserver/vs2.2.0-rc5.patch:@@ -2098,6 +2107,8 @@ int may_expand_vm(struct mm_struct *mm, 
./features/all/vserver/vs2.2.0-rc5.patch:       if (!may_expand_vm(mm, (new_len - old_len) >> PAGE_SHIFT)) {
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.3.patch: static inline int audit_expand(struct audit_buffer *ab, int extra)
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.3.patch:-    int ret = pskb_expand_head(skb, skb_headroom(skb), extra,
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.3.patch:+    int ret = pskb_expand_head(skb, 0, extra, ab->gfp_mask);
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.3.patch:             audit_log_lost("out of memory in audit_expand");
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:@@ -1699,6 +1699,11 @@ mptsas_sas_expander_pg0(MPT_ADAPTER *ioc, struct mptsas_portinfo *port_info,
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:-                    err = pskb_expand_head(e->skb, 0,
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:+                    nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:-                    err = pskb_expand_head(e->skb, 0,
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:+                    nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:-                    err = pskb_expand_head(e->skb, 0,
./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:+                    nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,


I do not know precisely the process but I added the Debian Kernel
Team in Cc, so that they are aware of the issue, with a pointer to the
beginning of the thread: 

Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/92426>

>From my understanding, I think that the Debian version of the 2.6.24 on
which I initially made my tests on was ok (pre-2.6.24.4). Then, I
updated it to a new 2.6.24-1 Debian version (so did Silviu), which
introduced the bug (it is in fact 2.6.24.4-based).

To sum it up, all post 2.6.24.4 kernels need the patch (2.6.24.4
included). This includes all 2.6.25.

Cheers,

a+

Re: [BUG,NETFILTER] nfqnl_mangle() not requesting enough space for bigger reinjected packet.

[Patrick McHardy]

Arnaud Ebalard wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sorry for the latency.
>   

Same here :)
> I think I just found why the 2.6.24 *Debian* kernel undergo the same
> issue. Basically because 2.6.24.4 kernel are also affected. Debian
> maintainers do apply during the build the patch switching to the use of
> skb_copy_expand() instead of pskb_expand_head() (as part of 2.6.24.4
> patch) ;-) :
>
> $:/tmp/linux-2.6-2.6.24/debian/patches$ grep -R _expand .
> ./features/all/vserver/vs2.2.0-rc5.patch:@@ -2098,6 +2107,8 @@ int may_expand_vm(struct mm_struct *mm, 
> ./features/all/vserver/vs2.2.0-rc5.patch:       if (!may_expand_vm(mm, (new_len - old_len) >> PAGE_SHIFT)) {
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.3.patch: static inline int audit_expand(struct audit_buffer *ab, int extra)
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.3.patch:-    int ret = pskb_expand_head(skb, skb_headroom(skb), extra,
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.3.patch:+    int ret = pskb_expand_head(skb, 0, extra, ab->gfp_mask);
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.3.patch:             audit_log_lost("out of memory in audit_expand");
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:@@ -1699,6 +1699,11 @@ mptsas_sas_expander_pg0(MPT_ADAPTER *ioc, struct mptsas_portinfo *port_info,
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:-                    err = pskb_expand_head(e->skb, 0,
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:+                    nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:-                    err = pskb_expand_head(e->skb, 0,
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:+                    nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:-                    err = pskb_expand_head(e->skb, 0,
> ./bugfix/all/stable/2.6.24.4.patch:+                    nskb = skb_copy_expand(e->skb, 0,
>
>
> I do not know precisely the process but I added the Debian Kernel
> Team in Cc, so that they are aware of the issue, with a pointer to the
> beginning of the thread: 
>
> Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/92426>
>
> >From my understanding, I think that the Debian version of the 2.6.24 on
> which I initially made my tests on was ok (pre-2.6.24.4). Then, I
> updated it to a new 2.6.24-1 Debian version (so did Silviu), which
> introduced the bug (it is in fact 2.6.24.4-based).
>
> To sum it up, all post 2.6.24.4 kernels need the patch (2.6.24.4
> included). This includes all 2.6.25.

Thanks for the explanation. I'll send it to -stable after running some 
tests.

Re: [BUG,NETFILTER] nfqnl_mangle() not requesting enough space for bigger reinjected packet.

[Arnaud Ebalard]

Hi,

Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net> writes:

>> To sum it up, all post 2.6.24.4 kernels need the patch (2.6.24.4
>> included). This includes all 2.6.25.
>
> Thanks for the explanation. I'll send it to -stable after running some
> tests.

Sorry to bother again but is there a chance you can send it for
inclusion in 2.6.25.4?

Cheers,

a+

Re: [BUG,NETFILTER] nfqnl_mangle() not requesting enough space for bigger reinjected packet.

[Patrick McHardy]

Arnaud Ebalard wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net> writes:
> 
>>> To sum it up, all post 2.6.24.4 kernels need the patch (2.6.24.4
>>> included). This includes all 2.6.25.
>> Thanks for the explanation. I'll send it to -stable after running some
>> tests.
> 
> Sorry to bother again but is there a chance you can send it for
> inclusion in 2.6.25.4?


Sorry for the delay, I sent it to -stable a few minutes ago.