netdev - Re: [regression] UDP recv data corruption

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: <54cd08089682aa14cc43236b0799ebf8424a23c5.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 02 Jul 2021 17:32:54 +0200
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Matthias Treydte <mt@...dheinz.de>
Cc:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, regressions@...ts.linux.dev,
        davem@...emloft.net, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, dsahern@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [regression] UDP recv data corruption

On Fri, 2021-07-02 at 17:23 +0200, Matthias Treydte wrote:
> Quoting Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>:
> 
> > ---
> > diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > index 54e06b88af69..458c888337a5 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
> > @@ -526,6 +526,8 @@ struct sk_buff *udp_gro_receive(struct list_head  
> > *head, struct sk_buff *skb,
> >                 if ((!sk && (skb->dev->features & NETIF_F_GRO_UDP_FWD)) ||
> >                     (sk && udp_sk(sk)->gro_enabled) ||  
> > NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_flist)
> >                         pp =  
> > call_gro_receive(udp_gro_receive_segment, head, skb);
> > +               else
> > +                       goto out;
> >                 return pp;
> >         }
> 
> Impressive! This patch, applied to 5.13, fixes the problem. What I  
> like even more is that it again confirms my suspicion that an "if"  
> without an "else" is always a code smell. :-)

Thank you for the quick feedback! I'll submit formally soon, after more
tests. I'll probably change the code to be something hopefully more
readable, as follow:

---
diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
index 7a670757f37a..b3aabc886763 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/udp_offload.c
@@ -551,8 +551,10 @@ struct sk_buff *udp_gro_receive(struct list_head *head, struct sk_buff *skb,
 
                if ((!sk && (skb->dev->features & NETIF_F_GRO_UDP_FWD)) ||
                    (sk && udp_sk(sk)->gro_enabled) || NAPI_GRO_CB(skb)->is_flist)
-                       pp = call_gro_receive(udp_gro_receive_segment, head, skb);
-               return pp;
+                       return call_gro_receive(udp_gro_receive_segment, head, skb);
+
+               /* no GRO, be sure flush the current packet */
+               goto out;
        }
---

> With this and the reproducer in my previous mail, is there still value  
> in doing the "perf" stuff?

Not needed, thank you!

Would be great instead if you could have a spin to the proposed variant
above - not stritly needed, I'm really asking for a few extra miles
here ;)

Cheers,

Paolo