[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <537CF5A2.3080401@pandora.be>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 20:51:14 +0200
From: Bart De Schuymer <bdschuym@...dora.be>
To: David Newall <davidn@...idnewall.com>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
CC: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: Revert 462fb2af9788a82a534f8184abfde31574e1cfa0 (bridge : Sanitize
skb before it enters the IP stack)
David Newall schreef op 21/05/2014 9:49:
>> An alternative would be to make sure that the data pointed to by IPCB
>> and BR_INPUT_SKB_CB don't overlap. If this were the case, we could
>> indeed just revert the commit that was referred to.
>
> They are identical spaces, but you imply a good point: the cb area is
> possibly being used, simultaneously, for two, incompatible purposes. Yet
> another argument for divorcing bridge of ip logic.
There's no reason why they should overlap in the cb: it's 48 bytes big,
so big enough to hold both struct br_input_skb_cb and struct
inet_skb_parm. The original problem was introduced when BR_INPUT_SKB_CB
was introduced (around Feb 27, 2010), so fixing BR_INPUT_SKB_CB seems
most appropriate to me.
As for your other remark: as I've said before, if you don't like
bridge-netfilter then don't compile it into your kernel.
Bart
--
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