netdev - Re: [PATCH net] net: core: Correctly iterate over lower adjacency list

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: <20161019153627.GA28249@splinter>
Date:   Wed, 19 Oct 2016 18:36:27 +0300
From:   Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...lanox.com, eladr@...lanox.com,
        yotamg@...lanox.com, nogahf@...lanox.com, ogerlitz@...lanox.com,
        dsa@...ulusnetworks.com, idosch@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: core: Correctly iterate over lower adjacency
 list

Hi Dave,

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 10:38:29AM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: idosch@...sch.org
> Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 16:57:08 +0300
> 
> > From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
> > 
> > Tamir reported the following trace when processing ARP requests received
> > via a vlan device on top of a VLAN-aware bridge:
>  ...
> > The problem is that netdev_all_lower_get_next_rcu() never advances the
> > iterator, thereby causing the loop over the lower adjacency list to run
> > forever.
> > 
> > Fix this by advancing the iterator and avoid the infinite loop.
> > 
> > Fixes: 7ce856aaaf13 ("mlxsw: spectrum: Add couple of lower device helper functions")
> > Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
> > Reported-by: Tamir Winetroub <tamirw@...lanox.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>
> 
> Applied.

Below the patch I noted "Please consider queueing this for 4.8.y", but
you didn't reply and I don't see it here:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/bundle/davem/stable/?state=*

So I'm not sure if this was rejected or you just missed my note.

Thanks