From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] netfilter: ipvs: Verify that IP_VS protocol has been registered Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 15:15:59 +0900 Message-ID: <20120426061558.GD13141@verge.net.au> References: <1335186732-16002-1-git-send-email-horms@verge.net.au> <1335186732-16002-2-git-send-email-horms@verge.net.au> <20120425091422.GA15049@1984> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Wensong Zhang , Julian Anastasov , Sasha Levin To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120425091422.GA15049@1984> Sender: lvs-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 11:14:22AM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:12:11PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > From: Sasha Levin > > > > The registration of a protocol might fail, there were no checks > > and all registrations were assumed to be correct. This lead to > > NULL ptr dereferences when apps tried registering. > > > > For example: > > > > [ 1293.226051] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 0000000000000018 > > [ 1293.227038] IP: [] tcp_register_app+0x60/0xb0 > > [ 1293.227038] PGD 391de067 PUD 6c20b067 PMD 0 > > [ 1293.227038] Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP > > [ 1293.227038] CPU 1 > > [ 1293.227038] Pid: 19609, comm: trinity Tainted: G W 3.4.0-rc1-next-20120405-sasha-dirty #57 > > [ 1293.227038] RIP: 0010:[] [] tcp_register_app+0x60/0xb0 > > [ 1293.227038] RSP: 0018:ffff880038c1dd18 EFLAGS: 00010286 > > [ 1293.227038] RAX: ffffffffffffffc0 RBX: 0000000000001500 RCX: 0000000000010000 > > [ 1293.227038] RDX: 0000000000000000 RSI: ffff88003a2d5888 RDI: 0000000000000282 > > [ 1293.227038] RBP: ffff880038c1dd48 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > > [ 1293.227038] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000000 R12: ffff88003a2d5668 > > [ 1293.227038] R13: ffff88003a2d5988 R14: ffff8800696a8ff8 R15: 0000000000000000 > > [ 1293.227038] FS: 00007f01930d9700(0000) GS:ffff88007ce00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > > [ 1293.227038] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 000000008005003b > > [ 1293.227038] CR2: 0000000000000018 CR3: 0000000065dfc000 CR4: 00000000000406e0 > > [ 1293.227038] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > > [ 1293.227038] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > > [ 1293.227038] Process trinity (pid: 19609, threadinfo ffff880038c1c000, task ffff88002dc73000) > > [ 1293.227038] Stack: > > [ 1293.227038] ffff880038c1dd48 00000000fffffff4 ffff8800696aada0 ffff8800694f5580 > > [ 1293.227038] ffffffff8369f1e0 0000000000001500 ffff880038c1dd98 ffffffff822a716b > > [ 1293.227038] 0000000000000000 ffff8800696a8ff8 0000000000000015 ffff8800694f5580 > > [ 1293.227038] Call Trace: > > [ 1293.227038] [] ip_vs_app_inc_new+0xdb/0x180 > > [ 1293.227038] [] register_ip_vs_app_inc+0x48/0x70 > > [ 1293.227038] [] __ip_vs_ftp_init+0xba/0x140 > > [ 1293.227038] [] ops_init+0x80/0x90 > > [ 1293.227038] [] setup_net+0x5b/0xe0 > > [ 1293.227038] [] copy_net_ns+0x76/0x100 > > [ 1293.227038] [] create_new_namespaces+0xfb/0x190 > > [ 1293.227038] [] unshare_nsproxy_namespaces+0x61/0x80 > > [ 1293.227038] [] sys_unshare+0xff/0x290 > > [ 1293.227038] [] ? trace_hardirqs_on_thunk+0x3a/0x3f > > [ 1293.227038] [] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b > > [ 1293.227038] Code: 89 c7 e8 34 91 3b 00 89 de 66 c1 ee 04 31 de 83 e6 0f 48 83 c6 22 48 c1 e6 04 4a 8b 14 26 49 8d 34 34 48 8d 42 c0 48 39 d6 74 13 <66> 39 58 58 74 22 48 8b 48 40 48 8d 41 c0 48 39 ce 75 ed 49 8d > > [ 1293.227038] RIP [] tcp_register_app+0x60/0xb0 > > [ 1293.227038] RSP > > [ 1293.227038] CR2: 0000000000000018 > > [ 1293.379284] ---[ end trace 364ab40c7011a009 ]--- > > [ 1293.381182] Kernel panic - not syncing: Fatal exception in interrupt > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > I've removed this above from the patch. I prefer not to add confusing > information (this means you'll have to rebase, sorry). Understood. > > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin > > Acked-by: Julian Anastasov > > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman > > Applied. Thanks. Thanks. > BTW, did you consider using an array for ipvs->ip_vs_proto_table? > > I think a hash table for only 5 protocols is overkill. I know, we'll > consume more memory but lookups will definitely be faster, but it will > consume a bit more memory (the space-time tradeoff again). That sounds reasonable to me.