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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [net/ipv6] ip6_output: Add ipv6_pinfo null check
To:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
        Gaurav Singh <gaurav1086@gmail.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        "open list:NETWORKING [IPv4/IPv6]" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20200727033810.28883-1-gaurav1086@gmail.com>
 <20200728021348.4116-1-gaurav1086@gmail.com>
 <CAM_iQpWbT18cRfDc2f1wVUrS6QpOmPrZwBqaitD7545-itijfg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4c4d94e2-e2b4-ee77-6942-f5d747a288e4@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 28 Jul 2020 07:41:36 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpWbT18cRfDc2f1wVUrS6QpOmPrZwBqaitD7545-itijfg@mail.gmail.com>
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 7/27/20 8:12 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 7:14 PM Gaurav Singh <gaurav1086@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Add return to fix build issue. Haven't reproduced this issue at
>> my end.
>>
>> My hypothesis is this: In function: ip6_xmit(), we have
>> const struct ipv6_pinfo *np = inet6_sk(sk); which returns NULL.
>>
>> Further down the function, there's a check:
>> if (np) hlimit = hp->htop_limit
> 
> This check exists before git history, at that time 'sk' could be NULL,
> hence 'np', so it does not mean it is still necessary now.
> 
> I looked at all callers of ip6_xmit(), I don't see how it is called with
> a non-full socket, neither 'sk' could be NULL after
> commit b30bd282cbf5c46247a279a2e8d2aae027d9f1bf
> ("[IPV6]: ip6_xmit: remove unnecessary NULL ptr check").
> 
> Thanks.
> 


Agreed.

And again, fact that this patch lacks a Fixes:  tag speaks for itself.

This means the author expects all reviewers to make a deep analysis.

Please bear with us, and add a Fixes: tag so that we can fully understand what was
the bug origin and why a fix is valid.