[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20161220.132813.435056880928769245.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:28:13 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: davej@...emonkey.org.uk
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ipv6: handle -EFAULT from skb_copy_bits
From: Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2016 13:17:28 -0500
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:36:23PM -0500, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>
> > Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 19:40:13 -0500
> >
> > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 07:31:44PM -0500, Dave Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > > Unfortunately, this made no difference. I spent some time today trying
> > > > to make a better reproducer, but failed. I'll revisit again tomorrow.
> > > >
> > > > Maybe I need >1 process/thread to trigger this. That would explain why
> > > > I can trigger it with Trinity.
> > >
> > > scratch that last part, I finally just repro'd it with a single process.
> >
> > Thanks for the info, I'll try to think about this some more.
>
> I threw in some debug printks right before that BUG_ON.
> it's always this:
>
> skb->len=31 skb->data_len=0 offset:30 total_len:9
>
> Shouldn't we have kicked out data_len=0 skb's somewhere before we got this far ?
skb->data_len is just the length of any non-linear data in the SKB.
This has to do with the SKB buffer layout and geometry, not whether
the packet is "fragmented" in the protocol sense.
So no, this isn't a criteria for packets being filtered out by this
point.
Can you try to capture what sk->sk_socket->type and
inet_sk(sk)->hdrincl are set to at the time of the crash?
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists