[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c8b30350-6e1c-8ad5-0150-a38996bef13f@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 21:09:55 +0100
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 02/10] udp/ipv6: move pending section of
udpv6_sendmsg
On 5/16/22 14:11, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-05-13 at 16:26 +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote:
>> Move up->pending section of udpv6_sendmsg() to the beginning of the
>> function. Even though it require some code duplication for sin6 parsing,
>> it clearly localises the pending handling in one place, removes an extra
>> if and more importantly will prepare the code for further patches.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
>> ---
>> net/ipv6/udp.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
>> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/ipv6/udp.c b/net/ipv6/udp.c
>> index 11d44ed46953..85bff1252f5c 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv6/udp.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv6/udp.c
>> @@ -1318,6 +1318,46 @@ int udpv6_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
>> ipc6.sockc.tsflags = sk->sk_tsflags;
>> ipc6.sockc.mark = sk->sk_mark;
>>
>> + /* Rough check on arithmetic overflow,
>> + better check is made in ip6_append_data().
>> + */
>> + if (unlikely(len > INT_MAX - sizeof(struct udphdr)))
>> + return -EMSGSIZE;
>> +
>> + getfrag = is_udplite ? udplite_getfrag : ip_generic_getfrag;
>> +
>> + /* There are pending frames. */
>> + if (up->pending) {
>> + if (up->pending == AF_INET)
>> + return udp_sendmsg(sk, msg, len);
>> +
>> + /* Do a quick destination sanity check before corking. */
>> + if (sin6) {
>> + if (msg->msg_namelen < offsetof(struct sockaddr, sa_data))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + if (sin6->sin6_family == AF_INET6) {
>> + if (msg->msg_namelen < SIN6_LEN_RFC2133)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + if (ipv6_addr_any(&sin6->sin6_addr) &&
>> + ipv6_addr_v4mapped(&np->saddr))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>
> It looks like 'any' destination with ipv4 mapped source is now
> rejected, while the existing code accept it.
It should be up->pending == AF_INET6 to get there, and previously it'd
fall into udp_sendmsg() and fail
if (unlikely(up->pending != AF_INET))
return -EINVAL;
I don't see it anyhow rejecting cases that were working before.
Can you elaborate a bit?
--
Pavel Begunkov
Powered by blists - more mailing lists