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:   Wed, 10 Aug 2022 14:09:42 -0700
From:   Jay Vosburgh <>
cc:     Sun Shouxin <>,,,,,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net:bonding:support balance-alb interface with vlan to bridge wrote:

>This patch was applied to netdev/net.git (master)
>by David S. Miller <>:
>On Mon,  8 Aug 2022 23:21:03 -0700 you wrote:
>> In my test, balance-alb bonding with two slaves eth0 and eth1,
>> and then Bond0.150 is created with vlan id attached bond0.
>> After adding bond0.150 into one linux bridge, I noted that Bond0,
>> bond0.150 and  bridge were assigned to the same MAC as eth0.
>> Once bond0.150 receives a packet whose dest IP is bridge's
>> and dest MAC is eth1's, the linux bridge will not match
>> eth1's MAC entry in FDB, and not handle it as expected.
>> The patch fix the issue, and diagram as below:
>> [...]
>Here is the summary with links:
>  - [v2] net:bonding:support balance-alb interface with vlan to bridge
>You are awesome, thank you!

	There looks to be a reference count leak in the existing patch
(ip_dev_find acquires a reference that is not released).  I.e., it needs
something like:

diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
index 60cb9a0225aa..b9dbad3a8af8 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_alb.c
@@ -668,8 +668,11 @@ static struct slave *rlb_arp_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct bonding *bond)
 	dev = ip_dev_find(dev_net(bond->dev), arp->ip_src);
 	if (dev) {
-		if (netif_is_bridge_master(dev))
+		if (netif_is_bridge_master(dev)) {
+			dev_put(dev);
 			return NULL;
+		}
+		dev_put(dev);
 	if (arp->op_code == htons(ARPOP_REPLY)) {

	I haven't tested this, but it seems correct.  Comments?

	I'll create a formal submission here in a bit.


	-Jay Vosburgh,

Powered by blists - more mailing lists