[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220718110119.17365d11@hermes.local>
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 11:01:19 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Fw: [Bug 216259] New: Setting SO_OOBINLINE after receiving OOB data
over TCP can cause that data to be received again
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2022 17:34:38 +0000
From: bugzilla-daemon@...nel.org
To: stephen@...workplumber.org
Subject: [Bug 216259] New: Setting SO_OOBINLINE after receiving OOB data over TCP can cause that data to be received again
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216259
Bug ID: 216259
Summary: Setting SO_OOBINLINE after receiving OOB data over TCP
can cause that data to be received again
Product: Networking
Version: 2.5
Kernel Version: 5.17.0
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
Tree: Mainline
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P1
Component: IPV4
Assignee: stephen@...workplumber.org
Reporter: zfigura@...eweavers.com
Regression: No
Created attachment 301451
--> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=301451&action=edit
test program demonstrating the bug
I'm not sure if this is a bug—I haven't fully read specs and perhaps it's
within spec for OOBINLINE or TCP or something—but it certainly looks like one.
The attached test program demonstrates the bug, and probably more clearly than
any verbal description. It sends and receives a byte of OOB data over a
(loopback) socket pair, sets the receiving socket to SO_OOBINLINE, and then
calls recv() again (without MSG_OOB). This results in the same byte being
received again.
If on the other hand a recv() call is made before setting SO_OOBINLINE [guarded
out with if(0)], the offending call does not succeed, which heightens my
suspicion that this is a bug.
--
You may reply to this email to add a comment.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists