netdev - Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: make ip6_create_rt_rcu return ip6_null

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: <CAEA6p_Cd5FNCnAXq2goOonS=Y6_vjysdqkwz0UycN6+Z2HTqQA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 18 Mar 2019 14:30:04 -0700
From:   Wei Wang <weiwan@...gle.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc:     Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>,
        network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: make ip6_create_rt_rcu return ip6_null_entry
 instead of NULL

On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 12:48 PM David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/18/19 12:36 PM, Xin Long wrote:
> > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > index 4ef4bbd..754777d 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > @@ -1040,13 +1040,17 @@ static struct rt6_info *ip6_create_rt_rcu(struct fib6_info *rt)
> >       struct rt6_info *nrt;
> >
> >       if (!fib6_info_hold_safe(rt))
> > -             return NULL;
> > +             goto fallback;
> >
> >       nrt = ip6_dst_alloc(dev_net(dev), dev, flags);
> > -     if (nrt)
> > +     if (nrt) {
> >               ip6_rt_copy_init(nrt, rt);
> > -     else
> > +     } else {
> >               fib6_info_release(rt);
> > +fallback:
> > +             nrt = dev_net(dev)->ipv6.ip6_null_entry;
> > +             dst_hold(&nrt->dst);
> > +     }
> >
> >       return nrt;
> >  }
>
> It seems appropriate for ip6_create_rt_rcu to always return an rt6_info
> given its use and v6 design. Since ip6_dst_alloc can also fail (e.g.,
> exceed gc_thresh) the fallback case should apply to both.

Agree. We should take care of ip6_dst_alloc() as well.