netdev - Re: net/arp: ARP cache aging failed.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2016 10:58:55 +0800
From:   YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
To:     Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
CC:     Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: net/arp: ARP cache aging failed.


On 2016/12/15 4:15, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> 
> 	Hello,
> 
> On Wed, 14 Dec 2016, YueHaibing wrote:
> 
>> On 2016/11/26 4:40, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>>>
>>> 	So, the idea is to move TCP and other similar
>>> users to the new dst_confirm_sk() method. If other
>>> dst_confirm() users are left, they should be checked
>>> if dsts with rt_gateway = 0 can be wrongly used.
>>
>> Sorry for so late.
> 
> 	In fact, I'm late too because I almost finished
> my changes, the only remaining part is the cxgb files...
> 
>> Based on your ideas, I make a patch and test it for a while.
> 
> 	The problem is that it is valid only for TCP.
> Also, this flag should be reset sometimes, eg. when sk dst
> changes...
> 
>> It works for me.
>>
>> @@ -847,7 +847,7 @@ static int ping_v4_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
>>  	return err;
>>
>>  do_confirm:
>> -	dst_confirm(&rt->dst);
>> +	dst_confirm_sk(sk);
> 
> 	MSG_CONFIRM from sendmsg needs special treatment. The
> problem is that UDP sending does not lock the socket, so I also
> added a skb flag to handle this situation in ip*_append_data.
> We do not want threaded application firing at different
> destinations to confirm the wrong neighbour. MSG_PROBE is
> another issue, the XFRM dst chaining, etc...
> 
> 	I hope, I'll be ready this weekend with few patches
> that change all dst_confirm users... There I'll explain
> everything in detail.
> 
> Regards
> 
> --
> Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
> 
> .
> 

Great, I'll be glad to do a testing.