[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20181007163811.18453-2-jhs@emojatatu.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2018 12:38:01 -0400
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To: davem@...emloft.net
Cc: jiri@...nulli.us, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Subject: [PATCH net-next 01/11] net: sched: cls_u32: disallow linking to root hnode
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Operation makes no sense. Nothing will actually break if we do so
(depth limit in u32_classify() will prevent infinite loops), but
according to maintainers it's best prohibited outright.
NOTE: doing so guarantees that u32_destroy() will trigger the call
of u32_destroy_hnode(); we might want to make that unconditional.
Test:
tc qdisc add dev eth0 ingress
tc filter add dev eth0 parent ffff: protocol ip prio 100 u32 \
link 800: offset at 0 mask 0f00 shift 6 plus 0 eat match ip protocol 6 ff
should fail with
Error: cls_u32: Not linking to root node
Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Signed-off-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
---
net/sched/cls_u32.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/sched/cls_u32.c b/net/sched/cls_u32.c
index 622f4657da94..3357331a80a2 100644
--- a/net/sched/cls_u32.c
+++ b/net/sched/cls_u32.c
@@ -797,6 +797,10 @@ static int u32_set_parms(struct net *net, struct tcf_proto *tp,
NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Link hash table not found");
return -EINVAL;
}
+ if (ht_down->is_root) {
+ NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Not linking to root node");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
ht_down->refcnt++;
}
--
2.11.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists