netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next RESEND] net: Do not call ndo_dflt_fdb_dump if ndo_fdb

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5494532D.4040203@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:	Fri, 19 Dec 2014 08:32:45 -0800
From:	Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	Hubert Sokolowski <hubert.sokolowski@...el.com>
CC:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>, vyasevic@...hat.com,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RESEND] net: Do not call ndo_dflt_fdb_dump if
 ndo_fdb_dump is defined.

On 12/19/14, 7:17 AM, Hubert Sokolowski wrote:
> On 18/12/14 22:32, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>
>> Sorry for the latency (head-buried-in-sand in effect)
>> On 12/17/14 11:18, Hubert Sokolowski wrote:
>>> I have just prepared a patch where I dump uc/mc for bridge devices
>>> by looking at (dev->priv_flags & IFF_EBRIDGE), so I have same results
>>> as without my changes. This should satisfy Jamal and Roopa.
>>> I could send it as v3 of my patch along with the results if you are
>>> interested.
>> Please do. If you satisfy Vlad's goals then we are all happy.
> Posted as v3, please review.
> There is still open question I asked sometime ago but never got explained.
> It is about the new filter_dev parameter that was added to ndo_fdb_dump:
>          int                     (*ndo_fdb_dump)(struct sk_buff *skb,
>                                                  struct netlink_callback *cb,
>                                                  struct net_device *dev,
>                                                  struct net_device *filter_dev,
>                                                  int idx);
>
> When we call this function for a device, dev pointer is passed as the filter_dev:
>                  if (dev->netdev_ops->ndo_fdb_dump)
>                          idx = dev->netdev_ops->ndo_fdb_dump(skb, cb, bdev, dev,
>                                                              idx);
seems like these calls should be fixed. bdev is really dev in this case. 
And filter_dev should be null.
>
> This is not an issue for a bridge device and a device that is not enslaved
> in a bridge because bdev == dev, but this can be dangerous in other cases.
> Let's assume QLogic NIC has a master device, in this case bdev != dev.
> Now look what is happening, dev is passed as filter_dev to:
> static int qlcnic_fdb_dump(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *ncb,
>                          struct net_device *netdev,
>                          struct net_device *filter_dev, int idx)
> {
>          struct qlcnic_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(netdev);
> ...
>
> netdev_priv(netdev) returns a pointer to private struct of the bridge,but the driver
> is expecting it's own private stuff.
>
> Should we fix the driver and assume filter_dev is /me and dev is our master
> or the parameters were reversed and should be passed as (skb, cb, dev, bdev, idx) ?
> Is this something for another patch/discussion?
>
> regards,
> Hubert
>

--
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