[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160825164622.GE1880@nanopsycho.orion>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 18:46:22 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Mahesh Bandewar
(महेश बंडेवार) <maheshb@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, idosch@...lanox.com,
eladr@...lanox.com, yotamg@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [patch net] team: loadbalance: push lacpdus to exact delivery
Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 06:37:35PM CEST, maheshb@...gle.com wrote:
>On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
>>
>> When team is in bridge and LACP is utilized, LACPDU packets are pushed
>> to userspace using raw socket and there they are processed. However,
>> since 8626c56c8279b, LACPDU skbs are dropped by bridge rx_handler so
>> they never reach packet handlers in rx path. Fix this by explicity treat
>> LACPDUs to be pushed to exact delivery in team rx_handler.
>>
>> Reported-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
>> Fixes: 8626c56c8279b ("bridge: fix potential use-after-free when hook returns QUEUE or STOLEN verdict")
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/team/team_mode_loadbalance.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/team/team_mode_loadbalance.c b/drivers/net/team/team_mode_loadbalance.c
>> index cdb19b3..e7c8210 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/team/team_mode_loadbalance.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/team/team_mode_loadbalance.c
>> @@ -17,6 +17,19 @@
>> #include <linux/filter.h>
>> #include <linux/if_team.h>
>>
>> +static rx_handler_result_t lb_receive(struct team *team, struct team_port *port,
>> + struct sk_buff *skb)
>> +{
>> + if (unlikely(skb->protocol == htons(ETH_P_SLOW))) {
>> + /* LACPDU packets should go to exact delivery */
>> + const unsigned char *dest = eth_hdr(skb)->h_dest;
>> +
>> + if (is_link_local_ether_addr(dest) && dest[5] == 0x02)
>> + return RX_HANDLER_EXACT;
>I believe every link-local-frame should get this treatment whether
>it's 802.3ad or otherwise (e.g. LLDP etc.), no?
>BTW same should be true for bonding too (of course except LACP since
>it handles/consumes it!)
I think so as well, but stayed more conservative for this fix. LLDP case
is handled in bridge rx_handler though...
>> + }
>> + return RX_HANDLER_ANOTHER;
>> +}
>> +
>> struct lb_priv;
>>
>> typedef struct team_port *lb_select_tx_port_func_t(struct team *,
>> @@ -652,6 +665,7 @@ static const struct team_mode_ops lb_mode_ops = {
>> .port_enter = lb_port_enter,
>> .port_leave = lb_port_leave,
>> .port_disabled = lb_port_disabled,
>> + .receive = lb_receive,
>> .transmit = lb_transmit,
>> };
>>
>> --
>> 2.5.5
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists