Re: [PATCH net v2] net: icmp: pass zeroed opts from icmp{,v6}_ndo_send before sending

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 3:25 PM Jason A. Donenfeld [off-list ref] wrote:

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 9:16 PM Willem de Bruijn
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:58 PM Jason A. Donenfeld [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 5:34 PM Willem de Bruijn
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Thanks for respinning.

Making ipv4 and ipv6 more aligned is a good goal, but more for
net-next than bug fixes that need to be backported to many stable
branches.

Beyond that, I'm not sure this fixes additional cases vs the previous
patch? It uses new on-stack variables instead of skb->cb, which again
is probably good in general, but adds more change than is needed for
the stable fix.

It doesn't appear to be problematic for applying to stable. I think
this v2 is the "right way" to handle it. Zeroing out skb->cb is
unexpected and weird anyway. What if the caller was expecting to use
their skb->cb after calling icmp_ndo_send? Did they think it'd get
wiped out like that? This v2 prevents that weird behavior from
happening.

quoted

My comment on fixing all callers of  icmp{,v6}_send was wrong, in
hindsight. In most cases IPCB is set correctly before calling those,
so we cannot just zero inside those. If we can only address the case
for icmp{,v6}_ndo_send I think the previous patch introduced less
churn, so is preferable. Unless I'm missing something.

As mentioned above it's weird and unexpected.

quoted

Reminder of two main comments: sufficient to zero sizeof(IPCB..) and
if respinning, please explicitly mention the path that leads to a
stack overflow, as it is not immediately obvious (even from reading
the fix code?).

I don't intend to respin v1, as I think v2 is more correct, and I
don't think only zeroing IPCB is a smart idea, as in the future that
code is bound to break when somebody forgets to update it. This v2
does away with the zeroing all together, though, so that the right
bytes to be zeroed are properly enforced all the time by the type
system.

I'm afraid this latest version seems to have build issues, as per the
patchwork bot.

Hmm I didn't get those bot emails. Either way, I'll do a bit of build
testing with different config knobs now and send a v3. Thanks for
letting me know.

Different bot :)

You might get emails from the other later. These can be found through
patchwork at

https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20210218160745.2343501-1-Jason@zx2c4.com/