netdev - [RFC net-next 1/2] net/sched: act_mirred: better wording on protection against excessive stack growth

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <ae44a3c9e42476d3a0f6edd87873fbea70b520bf.1671560567.git.dcaratti@redhat.com>
Date:   Tue, 20 Dec 2022 19:25:22 +0100
From:   Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>
To:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     jhs@...atatu.com, jiri@...nulli.us, marcelo.leitner@...il.com,
        pabeni@...hat.com, wizhao@...hat.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
        lucien.xin@...il.com
Subject: [RFC net-next 1/2] net/sched: act_mirred: better wording on protection against excessive stack growth

with commit e2ca070f89ec ("net: sched: protect against stack overflow in
TC act_mirred"), act_mirred protected itself against excessive stack growth
using per_cpu counter of nested calls to tcf_mirred_act(), and capping it
to MIRRED_RECURSION_LIMIT. However, such protection does not detect
recursion/loops in case the packet is enqueued to the backlog (for example,
when the mirred target device has RPS or skb timestamping enabled). Change
the wording from "recursion" to "nesting" to make it more clear to readers.

CC: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Signed-off-by: Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>
---
 net/sched/act_mirred.c | 16 ++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/sched/act_mirred.c b/net/sched/act_mirred.c
index 7284bcea7b0b..c8abb5136491 100644
--- a/net/sched/act_mirred.c
+++ b/net/sched/act_mirred.c
@@ -29,8 +29,8 @@
 static LIST_HEAD(mirred_list);
 static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(mirred_list_lock);
 
-#define MIRRED_RECURSION_LIMIT    4
-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, mirred_rec_level);
+#define MIRRED_NEST_LIMIT    4
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, mirred_nest_level);
 
 static bool tcf_mirred_is_act_redirect(int action)
 {
@@ -226,7 +226,7 @@ TC_INDIRECT_SCOPE int tcf_mirred_act(struct sk_buff *skb,
 	struct sk_buff *skb2 = skb;
 	bool m_mac_header_xmit;
 	struct net_device *dev;
-	unsigned int rec_level;
+	unsigned int nest_level;
 	int retval, err = 0;
 	bool use_reinsert;
 	bool want_ingress;
@@ -237,11 +237,11 @@ TC_INDIRECT_SCOPE int tcf_mirred_act(struct sk_buff *skb,
 	int mac_len;
 	bool at_nh;
 
-	rec_level = __this_cpu_inc_return(mirred_rec_level);
-	if (unlikely(rec_level > MIRRED_RECURSION_LIMIT)) {
+	nest_level = __this_cpu_inc_return(mirred_nest_level);
+	if (unlikely(nest_level > MIRRED_NEST_LIMIT)) {
 		net_warn_ratelimited("Packet exceeded mirred recursion limit on dev %s\n",
 				     netdev_name(skb->dev));
-		__this_cpu_dec(mirred_rec_level);
+		__this_cpu_dec(mirred_nest_level);
 		return TC_ACT_SHOT;
 	}
 
@@ -310,7 +310,7 @@ TC_INDIRECT_SCOPE int tcf_mirred_act(struct sk_buff *skb,
 			err = tcf_mirred_forward(want_ingress, skb);
 			if (err)
 				tcf_action_inc_overlimit_qstats(&m->common);
-			__this_cpu_dec(mirred_rec_level);
+			__this_cpu_dec(mirred_nest_level);
 			return TC_ACT_CONSUMED;
 		}
 	}
@@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ TC_INDIRECT_SCOPE int tcf_mirred_act(struct sk_buff *skb,
 		if (tcf_mirred_is_act_redirect(m_eaction))
 			retval = TC_ACT_SHOT;
 	}
-	__this_cpu_dec(mirred_rec_level);
+	__this_cpu_dec(mirred_nest_level);
 
 	return retval;
 }
-- 
2.38.1