| From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | [PATCH 4.9 14/51] netfilter: nf_ct_expect: Change __nf_ct_expect_check() return value. | Date | Thu, 19 Oct 2017 15:48:35 +0200 |
| |
4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Jarno Rajahalme <jarno@ovn.org>
[ Upstream commit 4b86c459c7bee3acaf92f0e2b4c6ac803eaa1a58 ]
Commit 4dee62b1b9b4 ("netfilter: nf_ct_expect: nf_ct_expect_insert() returns void") inadvertently changed the successful return value of nf_ct_expect_related_report() from 0 to 1 due to __nf_ct_expect_check() returning 1 on success. Prevent this regression in the future by changing the return value of __nf_ct_expect_check() to 0 on success.
Signed-off-by: Jarno Rajahalme <jarno@ovn.org> Acked-by: Joe Stringer <joe@ovn.org> Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@verizon.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> --- net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_expect.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_expect.c +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_expect.c @@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ static inline int __nf_ct_expect_check(s struct net *net = nf_ct_exp_net(expect); struct hlist_node *next; unsigned int h; - int ret = 1; + int ret = 0; if (!master_help) { ret = -ESHUTDOWN; @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ int nf_ct_expect_related_report(struct n spin_lock_bh(&nf_conntrack_expect_lock); ret = __nf_ct_expect_check(expect); - if (ret <= 0) + if (ret < 0) goto out; ret = nf_ct_expect_insert(expect);
|