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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <a127b7fe-82a7-53e9-8df4-704f1b295ada@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 08:04:51 -0600 From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org Cc: andreyknvl@...gle.com Subject: Re: [Patch net] ipv6: reorder ip6_route_dev_notifier after ipv6_dev_notf On 5/3/17 11:07 PM, Cong Wang wrote: > For each netns (except init_net), we initialize its null entry > in 3 places: > > 1) The template itself, as we use kmemdup() > 2) Code around dst_init_metrics() in ip6_route_net_init() > 3) ip6_route_dev_notify(), which is supposed to initialize it after > loopback registers > > Unfortunately the last one still happens in a wrong order because > we expect to initialize net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry->rt6i_idev to > net->loopback_dev's idev, so we have to do that after we add > idev to it. However, this notifier has priority == 0 same as > ipv6_dev_notf, and ipv6_dev_notf is registered after > ip6_route_dev_notifier so it is called actually after > ip6_route_dev_notifier. > > Fix it by specifying a smaller priority for ip6_route_dev_notifier. > > Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> > --- > net/ipv6/route.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c > index 2f11366..4dbf7e2 100644 > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c > @@ -4024,7 +4024,7 @@ static struct pernet_operations ip6_route_net_late_ops = { > > static struct notifier_block ip6_route_dev_notifier = { > .notifier_call = ip6_route_dev_notify, > - .priority = 0, > + .priority = -10, /* Must be called after addrconf_notify!! */ > }; > > void __init ip6_route_init_special_entries(void) > And I see a refcnt problem with this change: root@...ny-jessie2:~# unshare -n root@...ny-jessie2:~# logout root@...ny-jessie2:~# unshare -n Message from syslogd@...ny-jessie2 at May 4 07:04:38 ... kernel:[ 62.581552] unregister_netdevice: waiting for lo to become free. Usage count = 1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists