linux-kernel - [ 009/262] af_packet: remove BUG statement in tpacket_destruct

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

Message-Id: <20120928182959.060410943@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:	Fri, 28 Sep 2012 11:48:58 -0700
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel.borkmann@....ee.ethz.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [ 009/262] af_packet: remove BUG statement in tpacket_destruct_skb

From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

3.5-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: "danborkmann@...earbox.net" <danborkmann@...earbox.net>

[ Upstream commit 7f5c3e3a80e6654cf48dfba7cf94f88c6b505467 ]

Here's a quote of the comment about the BUG macro from asm-generic/bug.h:

 Don't use BUG() or BUG_ON() unless there's really no way out; one
 example might be detecting data structure corruption in the middle
 of an operation that can't be backed out of.  If the (sub)system
 can somehow continue operating, perhaps with reduced functionality,
 it's probably not BUG-worthy.

 If you're tempted to BUG(), think again:  is completely giving up
 really the *only* solution?  There are usually better options, where
 users don't need to reboot ASAP and can mostly shut down cleanly.

In our case, the status flag of a ring buffer slot is managed from both sides,
the kernel space and the user space. This means that even though the kernel
side might work as expected, the user space screws up and changes this flag
right between the send(2) is triggered when the flag is changed to
TP_STATUS_SENDING and a given skb is destructed after some time. Then, this
will hit the BUG macro. As David suggested, the best solution is to simply
remove this statement since it cannot be used for kernel side internal
consistency checks. I've tested it and the system still behaves /stable/ in
this case, so in accordance with the above comment, we should rather remove it.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel.borkmann@....ee.ethz.ch>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 net/packet/af_packet.c |    1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

--- a/net/packet/af_packet.c
+++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c
@@ -1943,7 +1943,6 @@ static void tpacket_destruct_skb(struct

 	if (likely(po->tx_ring.pg_vec)) {
 		ph = skb_shinfo(skb)->destructor_arg;
-		BUG_ON(__packet_get_status(po, ph) != TP_STATUS_SENDING);
 		BUG_ON(atomic_read(&po->tx_ring.pending) == 0);
 		atomic_dec(&po->tx_ring.pending);
 		__packet_set_status(po, ph, TP_STATUS_AVAILABLE);

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/