Thread (5 messages) flat view 5 messages, 4 authors, 2021-06-22

Re: [PATCH] bonding: avoid adding slave device with IFF_MASTER flag

From: Eric Dumazet <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-22 17:53:09


On 6/22/21 5:09 AM, zhudi wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Di Zhu <redacted>

The following steps will definitely cause the kernel to crash:
	ip link add vrf1 type vrf table 1
	modprobe bonding.ko max_bonds=1
	echo "+vrf1" >/sys/class/net/bond0/bonding/slaves
	rmmod bonding

The root cause is that: When the VRF is added to the slave device,
it will fail, and some cleaning work will be done. because VRF device
has IFF_MASTER flag, cleanup process  will not clear the IFF_BONDING flag.
Then, when we unload the bonding module, unregister_netdevice_notifier()
will treat the VRF device as a bond master device and treat netdev_priv()
as struct bonding{} which actually is struct net_vrf{}.

By analyzing the processing logic of bond_enslave(), it seems that
it is not allowed to add the slave device with the IFF_MASTER flag, so
we need to add a code check for this situation.

Signed-off-by: Di Zhu <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
index c5a646d06102..16840c9bc00d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
@@ -1601,6 +1601,12 @@ int bond_enslave(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev,
 	int link_reporting;
 	int res = 0, i;
 
+	if (slave_dev->flags & IFF_MASTER) {
Missing NL_SET_ERR_MSG( ?
+		netdev_err(bond_dev,
+			   "Error: Device with IFF_MASTER cannot be enslaved\n");
+		return -EPERM;
+	}
+
 	if (!bond->params.use_carrier &&
 	    slave_dev->ethtool_ops->get_link == NULL &&
 	    slave_ops->ndo_do_ioctl == NULL) {
This is strange, can you tell us why we keep the following lines after your patch ?

	if (bond_dev == slave_dev) {
		NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "Cannot enslave bond to itself.");
		netdev_err(bond_dev, "cannot enslave bond to itself.\n");
		return -EPERM;
	}

I was under the impression that a stack of bonding devices was allowed.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help