Received: by 2002:a25:1985:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 127csp209060ybz; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 07:37:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypL/qD7jELDom+iuabImkVqYI1ZmEMedDUfMQde4UMMVRF56JE71RpamPnI1zQsq0OmuSQR9 X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4c8e:: with SMTP id q14mr12730727eju.208.1587479852082; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 07:37:32 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1587479852; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=1Hn0FgKbp3Sn2g7cQC4HVMTTrIqbZd0ADm/NUsG0xn0IQgx5IxW8ccrDH+v/4sB1Fw 3hNNfsvwtmL9dsw4dSKLnuOBb99Aw+ue+hz5gd9L/hfCZNXlHltzv2xMTNt+xupcz8Pb N1lXTUCaU/eDWHVBzA8LTNc+EqkEtQ2AOwQQOozo3hxXdmOSsiqbmDkHSDHrpxWBOO3C 1GhT62lzn8uqwgxnl04oITwe/SDNQLMB+yVtERAcwCht2ymHa+GXt03GRLoJpbWyuMbl gLGAQGtwKYfd9RiO8dXaPIc+YoC5J81sR3HNmaeGZeBFpgNc9X8CGq0RI9TSvQIIhtT5 qvhA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from; bh=QWBMAo4Wf26P1qsavgsBMPGaZ056anerMMim+0xn1pk=; b=E+9I/tx6us3ELJyDZLNzLx0FGuO47hhvbwQ/TKA8IRsUZhcqVJcwYbgu2Ye1sBUd7s aGQw9qdqJkakkT3OoahPsjSC5pot4XgxmZaiPg0ABiygQEn8h/JtwJiMNhaKRORE9Oj+ nFKSMWTloAb9vwbLl30oY8W6Ju9df6ipOp3oIvJQPF/pEcjBr4KvANHn5TRXoFhzWmXs Xxp6gFcRtdWCsAduK25MH6q81AI8ugsdh2+M+9cNyG1xMqXu+CU2+34MOEAHrLDFjuMn jqO8gpARJ6N9mQGnVlpG0XGRbWTEXyYAg7IBLUUPyct+EtPzUp2dU26oTOciy2y20rzc JRHg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id dh23si775760edb.223.2020.04.21.07.37.08; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 07:37:32 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729366AbgDUOda (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:33:30 -0400 Received: from szxga07-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.35]:33942 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729174AbgDUOd2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 10:33:28 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS406-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.59]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 36298267342B093BC7CE; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 22:33:21 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.166.215.154) by DGGEMS406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.206) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.487.0; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 22:33:11 +0800 From: YueHaibing To: , , , CC: , , , YueHaibing Subject: [PATCH] xfrm: policy: Only use mark as policy lookup key Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 22:31:49 +0800 Message-ID: <20200421143149.45108-1-yuehaibing@huawei.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.10.2.windows.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Originating-IP: [10.166.215.154] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org While update xfrm policy as follow: ip -6 xfrm policy update src fd00::1/128 dst fd00::2/128 dir in \ priority 1 mark 0 mask 0x10 ip -6 xfrm policy update src fd00::1/128 dst fd00::2/128 dir in \ priority 2 mark 0 mask 0x00 ip -6 xfrm policy update src fd00::1/128 dst fd00::2/128 dir in \ priority 2 mark 0 mask 0x10 We get this warning: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 4808 at net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c:1548 Kernel panic - not syncing: panic_on_warn set ... CPU: 0 PID: 4808 Comm: ip Not tainted 5.7.0-rc1+ #151 Call Trace: RIP: 0010:xfrm_policy_insert_list+0x153/0x1e0 xfrm_policy_inexact_insert+0x70/0x330 xfrm_policy_insert+0x1df/0x250 xfrm_add_policy+0xcc/0x190 [xfrm_user] xfrm_user_rcv_msg+0x1d1/0x1f0 [xfrm_user] netlink_rcv_skb+0x4c/0x120 xfrm_netlink_rcv+0x32/0x40 [xfrm_user] netlink_unicast+0x1b3/0x270 netlink_sendmsg+0x350/0x470 sock_sendmsg+0x4f/0x60 Policy C and policy A has the same mark.v and mark.m, so policy A is matched in first round lookup while updating C. However policy C and policy B has same mark and priority, which also leads to matched. So the WARN_ON is triggered. xfrm policy lookup should only be matched when the found policy has the same lookup keys (mark.v & mark.m) no matter priority. Fixes: 7cb8a93968e3 ("xfrm: Allow inserting policies with matching mark and different priorities") Signed-off-by: YueHaibing --- net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c | 16 +++++----------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c index 297b2fd..67d0469 100644 --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c @@ -1436,13 +1436,7 @@ static void xfrm_policy_requeue(struct xfrm_policy *old, static bool xfrm_policy_mark_match(struct xfrm_policy *policy, struct xfrm_policy *pol) { - u32 mark = policy->mark.v & policy->mark.m; - - if (policy->mark.v == pol->mark.v && policy->mark.m == pol->mark.m) - return true; - - if ((mark & pol->mark.m) == pol->mark.v && - policy->priority == pol->priority) + if ((policy->mark.v & policy->mark.m) == (pol->mark.v & pol->mark.m)) return true; return false; @@ -1628,7 +1622,7 @@ int xfrm_policy_insert(int dir, struct xfrm_policy *policy, int excl) hlist_for_each_entry(pol, chain, bydst) { if (pol->type == type && pol->if_id == if_id && - (mark & pol->mark.m) == pol->mark.v && + mark == (pol->mark.m & pol->mark.v) && !selector_cmp(sel, &pol->selector) && xfrm_sec_ctx_match(ctx, pol->security)) return pol; @@ -1726,7 +1720,7 @@ struct xfrm_policy *xfrm_policy_byid(struct net *net, u32 mark, u32 if_id, hlist_for_each_entry(pol, chain, byidx) { if (pol->type == type && pol->index == id && pol->if_id == if_id && - (mark & pol->mark.m) == pol->mark.v) { + mark == (pol->mark.m & pol->mark.v)) { xfrm_pol_hold(pol); if (delete) { *err = security_xfrm_policy_delete( @@ -1898,7 +1892,7 @@ static int xfrm_policy_match(const struct xfrm_policy *pol, if (pol->family != family || pol->if_id != if_id || - (fl->flowi_mark & pol->mark.m) != pol->mark.v || + fl->flowi_mark != (pol->mark.m & pol->mark.v) || pol->type != type) return ret; @@ -2177,7 +2171,7 @@ static struct xfrm_policy *xfrm_sk_policy_lookup(const struct sock *sk, int dir, match = xfrm_selector_match(&pol->selector, fl, family); if (match) { - if ((sk->sk_mark & pol->mark.m) != pol->mark.v || + if (sk->sk_mark != (pol->mark.m & pol->mark.v) || pol->if_id != if_id) { pol = NULL; goto out; -- 1.8.3.1