lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: netfilter: nf_conntrack: there maybe a bug in __nf_conntrack_confirm, when it race against get_next_corpse
Date
(sorry to send this e-mail again, last mail is rejected by server due to
non-acceptable content)

Florian Westphal [mailto:fw@strlen.de] wrote:
>Correct. This is broken since the central spin lock removal, since
>nf_conntrack_lock no longer protects both get_next_corpse and
>conntrack_confirm.
>
>Please send a patch, moving dying check after removal of conntrack from
>the percpu list,
Since unconfirmed conntrack is stored in unconfirmed-list which is per-cpu
list and protected by per-cpu spin-lock, we can remove it from
uncomfirmed-list and insert it into ct-hash-table separately. that is to
say, we can remove it from uncomfirmed-list without holding corresponding
hash-lock, then check if it is dying.
if it is dying, we add it to the dying-list, then quit
__nf_conntrack_confirm. we do this to follow the rules that the conntrack
must alternatively at unconfirmed-list or dying-list when it is abort to be
destroyed.

>> 2. operation on ct->status should be atomic, because it race aginst
>> get_next_corpse.
>
>Alternatively we could also get rid of the unconfirmed list handling in
get_next_corpse,
>it looks to me as if its simply not worth the trouble to also caring
>about
unconfirmed lists.

yes, I think so.
if there is a race at operating ct->status, there will be in alternative
case:
1) IPS_DYING bit which set in get_next_corpse override other bits (e.g.
IPS_SRC_NAT_DONE_BIT), or
2) other bits (e.g. IPS_SRC_NAT_DONE_BIT) which set in nf_nat_setup_info
override IPS_DYING bit.
but, any case seems to be okay.
[unhandled content-type:application/octet-stream]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-04 03:01    [W:0.042 / U:1.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site