Messages in this thread | | | From | Jamal Hadi Salim <> | Date | Sun, 25 Sep 2022 13:08:16 -0400 | Subject | Re: [syzbot] WARNING in u32_change |
| |
Yes, after testing i realize there is nothing wrong here. What warning was i supposed to see from running the reproducer?
We will still add the test will multiple keys later
cheers, jamal
On Sun, Sep 25, 2022 at 12:29 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2022 at 9:14 AM Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> wrote: > > > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2022 at 11:38 AM Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com> wrote: > > > > > > Is there a way to tell the boat "looking into it?" > > > > > > I guess I have to swim across to it to get the message;-> > > > > I couldnt see the warning message but it is obvious by inspection that > > the memcpy is broken. We should add more test coverage. > > This should fix it. Will send a formal patch later: > > > > diff --git a/net/sched/cls_u32.c b/net/sched/cls_u32.c > > index 4d27300c2..591cbbf27 100644 > > --- a/net/sched/cls_u32.c > > +++ b/net/sched/cls_u32.c > > @@ -1019,7 +1019,7 @@ static int u32_change(struct net *net, struct > > sk_buff *in_skb, > > } > > > > s = nla_data(tb[TCA_U32_SEL]); > > - sel_size = struct_size(s, keys, s->nkeys); > > + sel_size = struct_size(s, keys, s->nkeys) + sizeof(n->sel); > > if (nla_len(tb[TCA_U32_SEL]) < sel_size) { > > err = -EINVAL; > > goto erridr; > > This patch is not needed, please look at struct_size() definition. > > Here, we might switch to unsafe_memcpy() instead of memcpy()
| |