[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5139454D.70706@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 09:56:29 +0800
From: Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
netfilter-devel <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: re L4 conntracking netns conversion
On 2013/03/08 09:32, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Gao feng <gaofeng@...fujitsu.com> writes:
>
>> On 2013/03/07 19:50, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
>>> Lots of netns changes!
>>>
>>> I can't verify right now, but unless I'm not mistaken,
>>> every L4 protocol conversion is buggy/oopsable/remotely ddosable
>>> because per-netns stuff is initialized after protocol is hooked into
>>> master dispatcher.
>>>
>>
>> Doesn't we do register_pernet_subsys before we register hooks and l4proto?
>> Sorry I don't quite understand what you mean. :(
>
>>> See c296bb4d5d417d466c9bcc8afef68a3db5449a64.
>
> The registration in the referenced commit has register_pernet_subsys
> happening after nf_ct_l4_proto_register. The unregistration is also
> happening in that order so something seems fishy. If there is
> an ordering dependency between the two unregistration should happen
> in the opposite order of registration.
>
Yes, we have the incorrect order when registering l4proto_sctp/gre/dccp/udplite.
> However, I don't know the code well enough to know if it is a problem or
> not.
>
Had better to fix this problem, Since the l4proto may access the memory before
register_pernet_subsys allocates it.
Thanks
--
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