lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH] openvswitch: Fix condition check by using nla_ok()
Date
Just using 'rem > 0' might be unsafe, so it's better
to use the nla_ok() instead.
Because we can see from the nla_next() that
'*remaining' might be smaller than 'totlen'. And nla_ok()
will avoid it happening.

Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn>
---
net/openvswitch/actions.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/openvswitch/actions.c b/net/openvswitch/actions.c
index 116e38a..8209ab1 100644
--- a/net/openvswitch/actions.c
+++ b/net/openvswitch/actions.c
@@ -915,7 +915,7 @@ static int output_userspace(struct datapath *dp, struct sk_buff *skb,
upcall.cmd = OVS_PACKET_CMD_ACTION;
upcall.mru = OVS_CB(skb)->mru;

- for (a = nla_data(attr), rem = nla_len(attr); rem > 0;
+ for (a = nla_data(attr), rem = nla_len(attr); nla_ok(a, rem);
a = nla_next(a, &rem)) {
switch (nla_type(a)) {
case OVS_USERSPACE_ATTR_USERDATA:
--
2.7.4
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-09-16 03:50    [W:0.032 / U:0.260 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site