On 13/01/17 18:24, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-01-13 at 13:34 +0000, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.k...@canonical.com>
>>
>> arp is being checked instead of arp_eth to see if the call to
>> __skb_header_pointer failed. Fix this by checking arp_eth is
>> null instead of arp.
>>
>> CoverityScan CID#1396428 ("Logically dead code") on 2nd
>> arp comparison (which should be arp_eth instead).
>>
>> Fixes: commit 55733350e5e8b70c5 ("flow disector: ARP support")
>> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.k...@canonical.com>
>> ---
>> net/core/flow_dissector.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/core/flow_dissector.c b/net/core/flow_dissector.c
>> index e3dffc7..fec48e9 100644
>> --- a/net/core/flow_dissector.c
>> +++ b/net/core/flow_dissector.c
>> @@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ bool __skb_flow_dissect(const struct sk_buff *skb,
>> sizeof(_arp_eth), data,
>> hlen - sizeof(_arp),
>> &_arp_eth);
>> - if (!arp)
>> + if (!arp_eth)
>> goto out_bad;
>>
>> if (dissector_uses_key(flow_dissector,
>
> It looks that we try very hard to add critical bugs in flow dissector.
>
> This is embarrassing really.
>
> I am questioning if the __skb_header_pointer() is correct
>
> Why using hlen - sizeof(_arp) ?
>
> arp_eth = __skb_header_pointer(skb, nhoff + sizeof(_arp),
> sizeof(_arp_eth), data,
> hlen - sizeof(_arp),
> &_arp_eth);
>
Yep, the sizeof maybe dubious too, I overlooked that one; if somebody
can clarify that then I'll send a V2 if it needs fixing up too.
Colin
