[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080115155655.d1a24eaf.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:56:55 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org, jckn@....net
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 9758] New: net_device refcnt bug when
NFQUEUEing bridged packets
On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:28:31 -0800 (PST)
bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org wrote:
> http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9758
>
> Summary: net_device refcnt bug when NFQUEUEing bridged packets
> Product: Networking
> Version: 2.5
> KernelVersion: 2.6.24-rc7
> Platform: All
> OS/Version: Linux
> Tree: Mainline
> Status: NEW
> Severity: normal
> Priority: P1
> Component: Netfilter/Iptables
> AssignedTo: networking_netfilter-iptables@...nel-bugs.osdl.org
> ReportedBy: jckn@....net
>
>
> The bug is probably around since the combination bridge+NFQUEUE is possible,
> and does not depend on distro or environment:
>
> Packets that are to be sent out over a bridge device are skb_clone()d in
> br_loop() before traversing the appropriate (FORWARD/OUTPUT) NF chain.
> The copies made by skb_clone() share their nf_bridge metadata with the
> original, which is no problem usually.
> If however one or more packets of a br_loop() run end up in a NFQUEUE,
> their shared nf_bridge metadata causes trouble when they are about to be
> reinjected: nf_reinject() decrements the net_device refcounts that were
> previously upped when queueing the packet in __nf_queue(), but as
> skb->nf_bridge->physoutdev points to the same device for all these
> packets, most (if not all) of them will affect the wrong refcnt.
>
> (I originally encountered the bug on a Xen host because the hypervisor
> refused to shutdown a virtual device with non-zero refcount... but it is
> perfectly reproducible with a standard kernel, too, although it was a
> bit more tedious to create a test scenario, involving a couple of UMLs.)
>
> I'd suggest to make a real copy of the nf_bridge member in br_loop() if
> CONFIG_BRIDGE_NETFILTER is defined, remedying the entanglement. I'd go ahead
> and create a patch, but I'm unsure as to where that logic should be
> implemented.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists