netdev - Re: Regression: net/ipv6/mld running system out of memory (not a leak)

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 10 Mar 2020 15:09:29 +0800
From:   Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To:     Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
Cc:     Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, John Crispin <john@...ozen.org>,
        Jo-Philipp Wich <jo@...n.io>
Subject: Re: Regression: net/ipv6/mld running system out of memory (not a
 leak)

On Mon, Mar 09, 2020 at 01:31:16PM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> > 2. Should we move ipv6_dev_mc_inc() from ipv6_add_dev() to ipv6_mc_up()?
> > I don't know yet, this dependents on whether we could add multicast address
> > on non-Ethernen dev.
> 
> I'm not the one to answer them surely with my limited net subsystem
> understanding :( Any idea how to proceed with this? I assume your patch
> is still the right step, do you think you can send it officially now?
> 
> 
> > > we call ipv6_mc_leave_localaddr() without ipv6_mc_join_localaddr()
> > > called first which seems unintuitive.
> > 
> > This doesn't matter much yet. As we will check if we have the address
> > in __ipv6_dev_mc_dec(), if not, we just return. But yes, form logic, this
> > looks asymmetric.
> 
> Right, just slightly unintuitive asymmetric code.

Hi Rafał,

I investigated this issue and am going to enable ipv6_mc_up for non-Ethernet
interface. The patch I sent you before will be post as a RFC for net-next.

Thanks
Hangbin