Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 16 May 2022 21:10:59 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v3 03/10] udp/ipv6: prioritise the ip6 path over ip4 checks | From | Pavel Begunkov <> |
| |
On 5/16/22 14:14, Paolo Abeni wrote: > On Fri, 2022-05-13 at 16:26 +0100, Pavel Begunkov wrote: >> For AF_INET6 sockets we care the most about ipv6 but not ip4 mappings as >> it's requires some extra hops anyway. Take AF_INET6 case from the address >> parsing switch and add an explicit path for it. It removes some extra >> ifs from the path and removes the switch overhead. >> >> Signed-off-by: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com> >> --- >> net/ipv6/udp.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++-------------------- >> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/ipv6/udp.c b/net/ipv6/udp.c >> index 85bff1252f5c..e0b1bea998ce 100644 >> --- a/net/ipv6/udp.c >> +++ b/net/ipv6/udp.c >> @@ -1360,30 +1360,27 @@ int udpv6_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len) >> >> /* destination address check */ >> if (sin6) { >> - if (addr_len < offsetof(struct sockaddr, sa_data)) >> - return -EINVAL; >> + if (addr_len < SIN6_LEN_RFC2133 || sin6->sin6_family != AF_INET6) { >> + if (addr_len < offsetof(struct sockaddr, sa_data)) >> + return -EINVAL; > > I think you can't access 'sin6->sin6_family' before validating the > socket address len, that is before doing:
Paolo, thanks for reviewing it!
sin6_family is protected by
if (addr_len < SIN6_LEN_RFC2133 ...)
on the previous line. I can add a BUILD_BUG_ON() if that would be more reassuring.
> > if (addr_len < offsetof(struct sockaddr, sa_data))
-- Pavel Begunkov
| |