From: pablo@netfilter.org
To: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: kaber@trash.net, Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] ipvs: Avoid undefined order of evaluation in assignments to struct nf_conn *
Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2011 20:41:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1307644862-3091-3-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1307644862-3091-1-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org>
From: Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net>
In net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_nfct.c::ip_vs_update_conntrack(),
net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c::ip_vs_nat_xmit(),
net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c::ip_vs_nat_xmit_v6(),
net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c::ip_vs_icmp_xmit)()
net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c::and ip_vs_icmp_xmit_v6() we do this:
...
struct nf_conn *ct = ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
...
Since '=' is not a sequence point the order of these assignments happening
is undefined. Luckily it's easy to avoid by just doing what is obviously
the intended thing:
struct nf_conn *ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
Signed-off-by: Jesper Juhl <jj@chaosbits.net>
Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
---
net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_nfct.c | 2 +-
net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c | 8 ++++----
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_nfct.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_nfct.c
index f454c80..a3d86c2 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_nfct.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_nfct.c
@@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ void
ip_vs_update_conntrack(struct sk_buff *skb, struct ip_vs_conn *cp, int outin)
{
enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;
- struct nf_conn *ct = ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
+ struct nf_conn *ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
struct nf_conntrack_tuple new_tuple;
if (ct == NULL || nf_ct_is_confirmed(ct) || nf_ct_is_untracked(ct) ||
diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c
index ee319a4..16d129e 100644
--- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_xmit.c
@@ -544,7 +544,7 @@ ip_vs_nat_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct ip_vs_conn *cp,
#if defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK) || defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_MODULE)
if (cp->flags & IP_VS_CONN_F_SYNC && local) {
enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;
- struct nf_conn *ct = ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
+ struct nf_conn *ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
if (ct && !nf_ct_is_untracked(ct)) {
IP_VS_DBG_RL_PKT(10, AF_INET, pp, skb, 0,
@@ -661,7 +661,7 @@ ip_vs_nat_xmit_v6(struct sk_buff *skb, struct ip_vs_conn *cp,
#if defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK) || defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_MODULE)
if (cp->flags & IP_VS_CONN_F_SYNC && local) {
enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;
- struct nf_conn *ct = ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
+ struct nf_conn *ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
if (ct && !nf_ct_is_untracked(ct)) {
IP_VS_DBG_RL_PKT(10, AF_INET6, pp, skb, 0,
@@ -1176,7 +1176,7 @@ ip_vs_icmp_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct ip_vs_conn *cp,
#if defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK) || defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_MODULE)
if (cp->flags & IP_VS_CONN_F_SYNC && local) {
enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;
- struct nf_conn *ct = ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
+ struct nf_conn *ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
if (ct && !nf_ct_is_untracked(ct)) {
IP_VS_DBG(10, "%s(): "
@@ -1296,7 +1296,7 @@ ip_vs_icmp_xmit_v6(struct sk_buff *skb, struct ip_vs_conn *cp,
#if defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK) || defined(CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_MODULE)
if (cp->flags & IP_VS_CONN_F_SYNC && local) {
enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo;
- struct nf_conn *ct = ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
+ struct nf_conn *ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo);
if (ct && !nf_ct_is_untracked(ct)) {
IP_VS_DBG(10, "%s(): "
--
1.7.2.5
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-06-09 18:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-06-09 18:40 [PATCH 0/4] netfilter patches for nf-next-2.6 pablo
2011-06-09 18:40 ` [PATCH 1/4] netfilter: nf_conntrack_sip: Handle Cisco 7941/7945 IP phones pablo
2011-06-09 18:41 ` pablo [this message]
2011-06-09 18:41 ` [PATCH 3/4] netfilter: nf_conntrack: remove one synchronize_net() pablo
2011-06-09 18:41 ` [PATCH 4/4] netfilter: nf_conntrack: provide config option to disable ancient procfs parts pablo
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=1307644862-3091-3-git-send-email-pablo@netfilter.org \
--to=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=jj@chaosbits.net \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).