[PATCH][net-next] esp6: fix incorrect null pointer check on xo

[PATCH][net-next] esp6: fix incorrect null pointer check on xo

[Colin King]

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

The check for xo being null is incorrect, currently it is checking
for non-null, it should be checking for null.

Detected with CoverityScan, CID#1429349 ("Dereference after null check")

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
---
 net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c b/net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c
index 1cceeee7cc33..95f10728abaa 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *esp6_gso_segment(struct sk_buff *skb,
 	netdev_features_t esp_features = features;
 	struct xfrm_offload *xo = xfrm_offload(skb);
 
-	if (xo)
+	if (!xo)
 		goto out;
 
 	seq = xo->seq.low;
-- 
2.11.0

[PATCH][net-next] esp6: fix incorrect null pointer check on xo

[Colin King]

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

The check for xo being null is incorrect, currently it is checking
for non-null, it should be checking for null.

Detected with CoverityScan, CID#1429349 ("Dereference after null check")

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
---
 net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c b/net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c
index 1cceeee7cc33..95f10728abaa 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/esp6_offload.c
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *esp6_gso_segment(struct sk_buff *skb,
 	netdev_features_t esp_features = features;
 	struct xfrm_offload *xo = xfrm_offload(skb);
 
-	if (xo)
+	if (!xo)
 		goto out;
 
 	seq = xo->seq.low;
-- 
2.11.0

Re: [PATCH][net-next] esp6: fix incorrect null pointer check on xo

[David Miller]

From: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:06:53 +0100

Trimming the CC: list down to something that actually makes
sense.

> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> The check for xo being null is incorrect, currently it is checking
> for non-null, it should be checking for null.
> 
> Detected with CoverityScan, CID#1429349 ("Dereference after null check")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

At a minimum you should work to check that you are CC:'ing the person
who added the code you are fixing.  You can use "git blame" for this.

Also, Steffen, you need to add the new IPSEC offload files to the
MAINTAINERS entry for iPSEC.

Thank you.

Re: [PATCH][net-next] esp6: fix incorrect null pointer check on xo

[Dan Carpenter]

It's in Steffen's tree, not the networking tree and he's not CC'd.  You
should really be adding Fixes tags because it helps to ensure you CC the
guilty parties.

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH][net-next] esp6: fix incorrect null pointer check on xo

[Dan Carpenter]

It's in Steffen's tree, not the networking tree and he's not CC'd.  You
should really be adding Fixes tags because it helps to ensure you CC the
guilty parties.

regards,
dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH][net-next] esp6: fix incorrect null pointer check on xo

[Steffen Klassert]

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 01:12:53PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 15:06:53 +0100
> 
> Trimming the CC: list down to something that actually makes
> sense.
> 
> > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > 
> > The check for xo being null is incorrect, currently it is checking
> > for non-null, it should be checking for null.
> > 
> > Detected with CoverityScan, CID#1429349 ("Dereference after null check")
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

I've added

Fixes: 7862b4058b9f ("esp: Add gso handlers for esp4 and esp6")

and applied it to ipsec-next, thanks!

> 
> At a minimum you should work to check that you are CC:'ing the person
> who added the code you are fixing.  You can use "git blame" for this.
> 
> Also, Steffen, you need to add the new IPSEC offload files to the
> MAINTAINERS entry for iPSEC.

Yes, will do a patch.