Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: bridge: fix potential null pointer dereference on
 return from br_port_get_rtnl()
To:     David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, garrmcnu@gmail.com
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, stephen@networkplumber.org,
        jiri@resnulli.us, bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20180621201427.4961-1-garrmcnu@gmail.com>
 <20180622.072056.1223319763674661318.davem@davemloft.net>
From:   Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com>
Message-ID: <e4fb2883-1643-a921-a138-d1255831a9bd@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Jun 2018 02:35:29 +0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180622.072056.1223319763674661318.davem@davemloft.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 06/22/2018 01:20 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Garry McNulty <garrmcnu@gmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 21:14:27 +0100
> 
>> br_port_get_rtnl() can return NULL if the network device is not a bridge
>> port (IFF_BRIDGE_PORT flag not set). br_port_slave_changelink() and
>> br_port_fill_slave_info() callbacks dereference this pointer without
>> checking. Currently this is not a problem because slave devices always
>> set this flag. Add null check in case these conditions ever changye.
>>
>> Detected by CoverityScan, CID 1339613 ("Dereference null return value")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Garry McNulty <garrmcnu@gmail.com>
> 
> I don't think this is reasonable.
> 
> The bridge code will never, ever, install a slave that doesn't have
> that bit set.  It's the most fundamental aspect of how these objects
> are managed.
> 
+1

This keeps coming up, here's the previous one:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/896046/

Please do a more thorough check if these conditions can actually occur.
In this case, as Dave said, they cannot.

To be explicit as with the patch I mentioned above:
Nacked-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com>

You can find more info in my reply to the patch above.

Thanks,
 Nik