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: <alpine.LFD.2.21.1904212142540.2345@ja.home.ssi.bg> Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2019 21:48:00 +0300 (EEST) From: Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg> To: linmiaohe <linmiaohe@...wei.com> cc: wensong@...ux-vs.org, horms@...ge.net.au, pablo@...filter.org, kadlec@...ckhole.kfki.hu, fw@...len.de, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, coreteam@...filter.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com, Mingfangsen <mingfangsen@...wei.com>, liujie165@...wei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ipvs:set sock send/receive buffer correctly Hello, On Thu, 18 Apr 2019, linmiaohe wrote: > From: Jie Liu <liujie165@...wei.com> > > If we set sysctl_wmem_max or sysctl_rmem_max larger than INT_MAX, the > send/receive buffer of sock will be an negative value. Same as when > the val is larger than INT_MAX/2. > > Fixes: 1c003b1580e2 ("ipvs: wakeup master thread") > Reported-by: Qiang Ning <ningqiang1@...wei.com> > Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com> > Signed-off-by: Jie Liu <liujie165@...wei.com> Looks good to me, thanks! Acked-by: Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg> > --- > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_sync.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_sync.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_sync.c > index 2526be6b3d90..760f3364d4a2 100644 > --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_sync.c > +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_sync.c > @@ -1278,14 +1278,22 @@ static void set_sock_size(struct sock *sk, int mode, int val) > /* setsockopt(sock, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, &val, sizeof(val)); */ > lock_sock(sk); > if (mode) { > - val = clamp_t(int, val, (SOCK_MIN_SNDBUF + 1) / 2, > - sysctl_wmem_max); > - sk->sk_sndbuf = val * 2; > + val = min_t(u32, val, sysctl_wmem_max); > + > + /* Ensure val * 2 fits into an int, to prevent max_t() > + * from treating it as a negative value. > + */ > + val = min_t(int, val, INT_MAX / 2); > + sk->sk_sndbuf = max_t(int, val * 2, SOCK_MIN_SNDBUF); > sk->sk_userlocks |= SOCK_SNDBUF_LOCK; > } else { > - val = clamp_t(int, val, (SOCK_MIN_RCVBUF + 1) / 2, > - sysctl_rmem_max); > - sk->sk_rcvbuf = val * 2; > + val = min_t(u32, val, sysctl_rmem_max); > + > + /* Ensure val * 2 fits into an int, to prevent max_t() > + * from treating it as a negative value. > + */ > + val = min_t(int, val, INT_MAX / 2); > + sk->sk_rcvbuf = max_t(int, val * 2, SOCK_MIN_RCVBUF); > sk->sk_userlocks |= SOCK_RCVBUF_LOCK; > } > release_sock(sk); > -- Regards -- Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists