From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wei Yongjun Subject: Re: xfrm: Fix initialize repl field of struct xfrm_state Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2011 17:18:18 +0800 Message-ID: <4D8717DA.2010901@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <4D86E603.8080704@cn.fujitsu.com> <20110320.225542.71119753.davem@davemloft.net> <4D86F1FD.3080009@cn.fujitsu.com> <20110320.234606.183056322.davem@davemloft.net> <20110321082512.GB27581@secunet.com> <4D871607.6090508@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Steffen Klassert Return-path: Received: from cn.fujitsu.com ([222.73.24.84]:62355 "EHLO song.cn.fujitsu.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751056Ab1CUJRw (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2011 05:17:52 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4D871607.6090508@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: >> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 11:46:06PM -0700, David Miller wrote: >>> Ok, thanks for the explanation. >>> >>> I think there is a simple way out of this: >>> >>> 1) Rename current xfrm_init_state to __xfrm_init_state, add >>> "bool init_replay" argument. Add the xfrm_init_replay() >>> call, as in your patch, but conditionalized on this boolean. >>> >>> 2) Implement xfrm_init_state as inline, which calls >>> __xfrm_init_state(..., true) >>> >>> 3) Replace xfrm_init_state() call in xfrm_user.c with >>> __xfrm_init_state(..., false) >>> >>> This seems to avoid all the problems. We don't need to touch every >>> caller, and we avoid initializing the replay state twice in xfrm_user >>> >> Btw, looking a bit closer to this. I think it would look a bit cleaner >> if we would add the xfrm_init_replay() call to xfrm_init_state() and >> to move the xfrm_init_state() call in xfrm_state_construct() behind >> the assign of the replay settings. > The xfrm_init_replay() should be call after the call to > xfrm_update_ae_params(x, attrs); > since xfrm_update_ae_params() may update the replay_esn. > > So we need move the xfrm_init_state() call just before return x. Oh, sorry, the memcpy looks like dup code since we used kmemdup. It is the same attr XFRMA_REPLAY_ESN_VAL. > The other issue: > static void xfrm_update_ae_params() > { > ... > memcpy(x->replay_esn, replay_esn, > xfrm_replay_state_esn_len(replay_esn)); > ... > } > > the memcpy() may cause memory overlap if we build a special > nl_data, we should free it and then do kmemdup()? > >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >> > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >