From: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
To: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
Cc: <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
<kuba@kernel.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xfrm: policy: Only use mark as policy lookup key
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 11:33:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200422093344.GY13121@gauss3.secunet.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200421143149.45108-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com>
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 10:31:49PM +0800, YueHaibing wrote:
> While update xfrm policy as follow:
>
> ip -6 xfrm policy update src fd00::1/128 dst fd00::2/128 dir in \
> priority 1 mark 0 mask 0x10
> ip -6 xfrm policy update src fd00::1/128 dst fd00::2/128 dir in \
> priority 2 mark 0 mask 0x00
> ip -6 xfrm policy update src fd00::1/128 dst fd00::2/128 dir in \
> priority 2 mark 0 mask 0x10
>
> We get this warning:
>
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 4808 at net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1548
> Kernel panic - not syncing: panic_on_warn set ...
> CPU: 0 PID: 4808 Comm: ip Not tainted 5.7.0-rc1+ #151
> Call Trace:
> RIP: 0010:xfrm_policy_insert_list+0x153/0x1e0
> xfrm_policy_inexact_insert+0x70/0x330
> xfrm_policy_insert+0x1df/0x250
> xfrm_add_policy+0xcc/0x190 [xfrm_user]
> xfrm_user_rcv_msg+0x1d1/0x1f0 [xfrm_user]
> netlink_rcv_skb+0x4c/0x120
> xfrm_netlink_rcv+0x32/0x40 [xfrm_user]
> netlink_unicast+0x1b3/0x270
> netlink_sendmsg+0x350/0x470
> sock_sendmsg+0x4f/0x60
>
> Policy C and policy A has the same mark.v and mark.m, so policy A is
> matched in first round lookup while updating C. However policy C and
> policy B has same mark and priority, which also leads to matched. So
> the WARN_ON is triggered.
>
> xfrm policy lookup should only be matched when the found policy has the
> same lookup keys (mark.v & mark.m) no matter priority.
>
> Fixes: 7cb8a93968e3 ("xfrm: Allow inserting policies with matching mark and different priorities")
> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
> ---
> net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 16 +++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> index 297b2fd..67d0469 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> @@ -1436,13 +1436,7 @@ static void xfrm_policy_requeue(struct xfrm_policy *old,
> static bool xfrm_policy_mark_match(struct xfrm_policy *policy,
> struct xfrm_policy *pol)
> {
> - u32 mark = policy->mark.v & policy->mark.m;
> -
> - if (policy->mark.v == pol->mark.v && policy->mark.m == pol->mark.m)
> - return true;
> -
> - if ((mark & pol->mark.m) == pol->mark.v &&
> - policy->priority == pol->priority)
If you remove the priority check, you can't insert policies with matching
mark and different priorities anymore. This brings us back the old bug.
I plan to apply the patch from Xin Long, this seems to be the right way
to address this problem.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-22 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-21 14:31 [PATCH] xfrm: policy: Only use mark as policy lookup key YueHaibing
2020-04-22 9:33 ` Steffen Klassert [this message]
2020-04-22 12:18 ` Yuehaibing
2020-04-22 15:41 ` Xin Long
2020-04-22 15:54 ` Xin Long
2020-04-23 2:25 ` Yuehaibing
2020-04-23 6:37 ` Xin Long
2020-04-23 8:40 ` Yuehaibing
2020-04-23 9:43 ` Xin Long
2020-04-24 3:48 ` Yuehaibing
2020-04-30 6:30 ` Yuehaibing
2020-04-22 12:53 ` [PATCH v2] xfrm: policy: Fix xfrm policy match YueHaibing
2020-05-15 8:39 ` Yuehaibing
2020-05-19 8:53 ` Steffen Klassert
2020-05-21 6:49 ` Xin Long
2020-05-22 1:45 ` Yuehaibing
2020-05-22 5:49 ` Xin Long
2020-05-22 12:39 ` Yuehaibing
2020-05-23 9:02 ` Xin Long
2020-05-25 3:04 ` Yuehaibing
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20200422093344.GY13121@gauss3.secunet.de \
--to=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lucien.xin@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yuehaibing@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).