Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 15:43 -0800, Daniele Di Proietto wrote:
> > If nf_ct_frag6_gather() returns an error other than -EINPROGRESS, it
> > means that we still have a reference to the skb. We should free it
> > before returning from handle_fragments, as stated in the comment above.
> >
> > Fixes: daaa7d647f81 ("netfilter: ipv6: avoid nf_iterate recursion")
> > CC: Florian Westphal <f...@strlen.de>
> > CC: Pravin B Shelar <pshe...@ovn.org>
> > CC: Joe Stringer <j...@ovn.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Daniele Di Proietto <diproiet...@ovn.org>
> > ---
> > net/openvswitch/conntrack.c | 5 ++++-
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/openvswitch/conntrack.c b/net/openvswitch/conntrack.c
> > index 31045ef..fecefa2 100644
> > --- a/net/openvswitch/conntrack.c
> > +++ b/net/openvswitch/conntrack.c
> > @@ -370,8 +370,11 @@ static int handle_fragments(struct net *net, struct
> > sw_flow_key *key,
> > skb_orphan(skb);
> > memset(IP6CB(skb), 0, sizeof(struct inet6_skb_parm));
> > err = nf_ct_frag6_gather(net, skb, user);
> > - if (err)
> > + if (err) {
> > + if (err != -EINPROGRESS)
> > + kfree_skb(skb);
> > return err;
> > + }
> >
> > key->ip.proto = ipv6_hdr(skb)->nexthdr;
> > ovs_cb.mru = IP6CB(skb)->frag_max_size;
>
> Interesting, have you followed the "GPF in eth_header" thread today ?
>
> In a nutshell, we want a complete patch, not something that would solve
> part of the problem.
I think this patch is fine, intent seems to be to only take fully reassembled
skb, rather than a stray fragment (ovs does NOT seem to call handle_fragments
in case skb is already known to not contain a fragment header, afaics).
I'll send a patch for the GPF in eth_header thing soon.
