netdev - Re: [PATCH][net-next] net: slightly optimize eth_type

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]

Date:   Sat, 17 Nov 2018 16:51:38 -0800 (PST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:     lirongqing@...du.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][net-next] net: slightly optimize eth_type_trans

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2018 14:37:12 -0800

> 
> 
> On 11/15/2018 03:11 PM, David Miller wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Applied.
>> 
> 
> While reviewing this stuff, I found we have a bug.
> 
> If napi_reuse_skb() is called, we might inherit from prior skb->pkt_type value.
> 
> It seems that GRO could aggregate packets with pkt_type != PACKET_HOST, right ?
> 
> David, any objection if I submit the following fix ?

Oh weird, so we do GRO frags accumulation using SKB which never goes through
eth_type_trans()?

I don't understand how we can, in this circumstance, assume PACKET_HOST?

Because that is what your suggested patch does.

Frame could be UDP multicast, and we could legitimately GRO accumulate it.
In that situations setting PACKET_HOST doesn't seem correct.