[email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
> From: Gao Feng <[email protected]>
>
> When memory is exhausted, nfct_seqadj_ext_add may fail to add the seqadj
> extension. But the function nf_ct_seqadj_init doesn't check if get valid
> seqadj pointer by the nfct_seqadj, while other functions perform the
> sanity check.
>
> So the system would be panic when nfct_seqadj_ext_add failed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gao Feng <[email protected]>
> diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_seqadj.c
> b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_seqadj.c
> index dff0f0c..2c8e201 100644
> --- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_seqadj.c
> +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_seqadj.c
> @@ -16,9 +16,14 @@ int nf_ct_seqadj_init(struct nf_conn *ct, enum
> ip_conntrack_info ctinfo,
> if (off == 0)
> return 0;
>
> + seqadj = nfct_seqadj(ct);
> + if (unlikely(!seqadj)) {
> + WARN_ONCE(1, "Missing nfct_seqadj_ext_add() setup call\n");
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
Not sure this WARN() is really needed, I would remove it (since its most
likely only missing due to memory shortage).
Other than that, this looks good.
