linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v2 2/2] ipv6: fix ECMP route replacement

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]

Date:	Thu, 14 May 2015 20:58:59 +0200
From:	Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
To:	Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
	James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	roopa <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 2/2] ipv6: fix ECMP route replacement

Le 13/05/2015 21:59, Michal Kubecek a écrit :
> When replacing an IPv6 multipath route with "ip route replace", i.e.
> NLM_F_CREATE | NLM_F_REPLACE, fib6_add_rt2node() replaces only first
> matching route without fixing its siblings, resulting in corrupted
> siblings linked list; removing one of the siblings can then end in an
> infinite loop.
>
> Replacing the whole set of nexthops does IMHO make more sense than
> replacing a random one. We also need to remove the NLM_F_REPLACE flag
> after replacing old nexthops by first new so that each subsequent
> nexthop does not replace previous one.
>
> Fixes: 51ebd3181572 ("ipv6: add support of equal cost multipath (ECMP)")
> Signed-off-by: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>
> ---
>   net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
>   net/ipv6/route.c   |  8 +++++---
>   2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c b/net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c
> index 96dbffff5a24..abf4e4e5bdab 100644
> --- a/net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c
> +++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_fib.c
> @@ -815,6 +815,8 @@ add:
>   		}
>
>   	} else {
> +		struct rt6_info *next;
> +
>   		if (!found) {
>   			if (add)
>   				goto add;
> @@ -828,15 +830,24 @@ add:
>
>   		*ins = rt;
>   		rt->rt6i_node = fn;
> -		rt->dst.rt6_next = iter->dst.rt6_next;
> +
> +		/* skip potential siblings */
> +		next = iter->dst.rt6_next;
> +		while (next && next->rt6i_metric == rt->rt6i_metric)
> +			next = next->dst.rt6_next;
I wonder if we should not loop over the siblings list here (rt->rt6i_siblings).
Only routes that match 'rt6_qualify_for_ecmp()' are siblings.

> +		rt->dst.rt6_next = next;
> +
>   		atomic_inc(&rt->rt6i_ref);
>   		inet6_rt_notify(RTM_NEWROUTE, rt, info);
>   		if (!(fn->fn_flags & RTN_RTINFO)) {
>   			info->nl_net->ipv6.rt6_stats->fib_route_nodes++;
>   			fn->fn_flags |= RTN_RTINFO;
>   		}
> -		fib6_purge_rt(iter, fn, info->nl_net);
> -		rt6_release(iter);
> +		while (iter != next) {
> +			fib6_purge_rt(iter, fn, info->nl_net);
> +			rt6_release(iter);
> +			iter = iter->dst.rt6_next;
> +		}
Same here.
--
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/