[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2023100914-flaccid-staining-19c9@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2023 20:24:43 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, lwn@....net,
jslaby@...e.cz
Subject: Re: Linux 4.14.324
On Mon, Oct 09, 2023 at 11:36:35AM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 05:02:37PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > I'm announcing the release of the 4.14.324 kernel.
> >
> > All users of the 4.14 kernel series must upgrade.
> >
> > The updated 4.14.y git tree can be found at:
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git linux-4.14.y
> > and can be browsed at the normal kernel.org git web browser:
> > https://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git;a=summary
> >
> ...
> >
> > Ido Schimmel (1):
> > rtnetlink: Reject negative ifindexes in RTM_NEWLINK
>
>
> The above commit (69197b2 rtnetlink: Reject negative ifindexes in RTM_NEWLINK)
> appears to has been applied icorrectly, causing some regressions (like attaching
> a VF to a running guest). The change needs to be made in rtnl_newlink(), not
> rtnl_setlink().
>
> I didn't check all other branches but at least 5.4 looks OK.
>
> I believe 69197b2 needs to be reverted and instead this applied:
>
> diff --git a/net/core/rtnetlink.c b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> index a76f3024..f4b98f7 100644
> --- a/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> +++ b/net/core/rtnetlink.c
> @@ -2547,9 +2547,12 @@ static int rtnl_newlink(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
> ifname[0] = '\0';
>
> ifm = nlmsg_data(nlh);
> - if (ifm->ifi_index > 0)
> + if (ifm->ifi_index > 0) {
> dev = __dev_get_by_index(net, ifm->ifi_index);
> - else {
> + } else if (ifm->ifi_index < 0) {
> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "ifindex can't be negative");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + } else {
> if (ifname[0])
> dev = __dev_get_by_name(net, ifname);
> else
>
>
Ick, good catch! 4.19 also looks wrong, let me go revert the original
and then use this version again instead, many thanks for this!
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists