netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] bonding: Always assign be16 value to vlan

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: <ZF4G1f2tr7SmjIs1@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 12 May 2023 11:28:53 +0200
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] bonding: Always assign be16 value to
 vlan_proto

On Thu, May 11, 2023 at 04:43:57PM -0700, Jay Vosburgh wrote:
> Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org> wrote:
> 
> >The type of the vlan_proto field is __be16.
> >And most users of the field use it as such.
> >
> >In the case of setting or testing the field for the special VLAN_N_VID
> >value, host byte order is used. Which seems incorrect.
> >
> >It also seems somewhat odd to store a VLAN ID value in a field that is
> >otherwise used to store Ether types.
> >
> >Address this issue by defining BOND_VLAN_PROTO_NONE, a big endian value.
> >0xffff was chosen somewhat arbitrarily. What is important is that it
> >doesn't overlap with any valid VLAN Ether types.
> 
> As I think you mentioned, 0xffff is marked as a reserved ethertype.

Yes, it seems that I did. It is reserved in RFC-1701.

I can work it into the patch description if you like - there is no
particular reason I didn't for v2.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZEI0zpDyJtfogO7s@kernel.org/
[2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1701.html
[3] https://www.iana.org/assignments/ieee-802-numbers/ieee-802-numbers.xhtml

> >I don't believe the problems described above are a bug because
> >VLAN_N_VID in both little-endian and big-endian byte order does not
> >conflict with any supported VLAN Ether types in big-endian byte order.
> >
> >Reported by sparse as:
> >
> > .../bond_main.c:2857:26: warning: restricted __be16 degrades to integer
> > .../bond_main.c:2863:20: warning: restricted __be16 degrades to integer
> > .../bond_main.c:2939:40: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types)
> > .../bond_main.c:2939:40:    expected restricted __be16 [usertype] vlan_proto
> > .../bond_main.c:2939:40:    got int
> >
> >No functional changes intended.
> >Compile tested only.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
> 
> Acked-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
> 
> 	-J
> 
> >---
> >Changes in v2:
> >- Decribe Ether Type aspect of problem in patch description
> >- Use an Ether Type rather than VID valie as sential
> >- Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230420-bonding-be-vlan-proto-v1-1-754399f51d01@kernel.org
> >---
> > drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 8 +++++---
> > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> >index 3fed888629f7..ebf61c19dcef 100644
> >--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> >+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
> >@@ -2871,6 +2871,8 @@ static bool bond_has_this_ip(struct bonding *bond, __be32 ip)
> > 	return ret;
> > }
> > 
> >+#define BOND_VLAN_PROTO_NONE cpu_to_be16(0xffff)
> >+
> > static bool bond_handle_vlan(struct slave *slave, struct bond_vlan_tag *tags,
> > 			     struct sk_buff *skb)
> > {
> >@@ -2878,13 +2880,13 @@ static bool bond_handle_vlan(struct slave *slave, struct bond_vlan_tag *tags,
> > 	struct net_device *slave_dev = slave->dev;
> > 	struct bond_vlan_tag *outer_tag = tags;
> > 
> >-	if (!tags || tags->vlan_proto == VLAN_N_VID)
> >+	if (!tags || tags->vlan_proto == BOND_VLAN_PROTO_NONE)
> > 		return true;
> > 
> > 	tags++;
> > 
> > 	/* Go through all the tags backwards and add them to the packet */
> >-	while (tags->vlan_proto != VLAN_N_VID) {
> >+	while (tags->vlan_proto != BOND_VLAN_PROTO_NONE) {
> > 		if (!tags->vlan_id) {
> > 			tags++;
> > 			continue;
> >@@ -2960,7 +2962,7 @@ struct bond_vlan_tag *bond_verify_device_path(struct net_device *start_dev,
> > 		tags = kcalloc(level + 1, sizeof(*tags), GFP_ATOMIC);
> > 		if (!tags)
> > 			return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> >-		tags[level].vlan_proto = VLAN_N_VID;
> >+		tags[level].vlan_proto = BOND_VLAN_PROTO_NONE;
> > 		return tags;
> > 	}
> > 
> >
> >
> 
> ---
> 	-Jay Vosburgh, jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
>