linux-kernel - Re: WARNING in sk_stream_kill

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, 3 Dec 2020 19:01:21 +0100
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc:     netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        syzbot <syzbot+7b99aafdcc2eedea6178@...kaller.appspotmail.com>
Subject: Re: WARNING in sk_stream_kill_queues (5)



On 12/3/20 6:41 PM, Marco Elver wrote:

> One more experiment -- simply adding
> 
> --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> @@ -207,7 +207,21 @@ struct sk_buff *__alloc_skb(unsigned int size, gfp_t gfp_mask,
>  	 */
>  	size = SKB_DATA_ALIGN(size);
>  	size += SKB_DATA_ALIGN(sizeof(struct skb_shared_info));
> +	size = 1 << kmalloc_index(size); /* HACK */
>  	data = kmalloc_reserve(size, gfp_mask, node, &pfmemalloc);
> 
> 
> also got rid of the warnings. Something must be off with some value that
> is computed in terms of ksize(). If not, I don't have any explanation
> for why the above hides the problem.

Maybe the implementations of various macros (SKB_DATA_ALIGN and friends)
hae some kind of assumptions, I will double check this.