[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1318973032.19139.5.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 23:23:52 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Jim Sansing <jjsansing@...izon.net>
Cc: Linux Network Development list <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Comment on nf_queue NF_STOLEN patch
Le mardi 18 octobre 2011 à 15:08 -0400, Jim Sansing a écrit :
> I have been working on a kernel module that registers with netfilter,
> and I noticed that a patch was added to nf_queue that changed the
> handling of return code NF_FILTER from 'do nothing' to 'free the skb'.
> I'm not sure which kernel version this went in, but the date of the
> patch is Feb, 19, 2010.
>
> Everything I have read about netfilter states that it is up to the
> netfilter hook to free the skb if NF_STOLEN is returned. The
> implications of this patch from a hook programming perspective are:
>
> 1) If the skb is used after the return from the hook, it must be cloned.
> 2) The original skb must not be freed.
>
> I suggest that a comment be added to include/linux/netfilter.h that says
> explicitly the skb will be freed if NF_STOLEN is returned.
But its not true. Just read the code.
If you are working on this stuff I recommend you take a look at
commits :
c6675233f9015d3c0460c8aab53ed9b99d915c64
(netfilter: nf_queue: reject NF_STOLEN verdicts from userspace)
fad54440438a7c231a6ae347738423cbabc936d9
(netfilter: avoid double free in nf_reinject)
64507fdbc29c3a622180378210ecea8659b14e40
(netfilter: nf_queue: fix NF_STOLEN skb leak)
3bc38712e3a6e0596ccb6f8299043a826f983701
([NETFILTER]: nf_queue: handle NF_STOP and unknown verdicts in
nf_reinject)
--
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