Re: [PATCH net] net: gro: set the last skb->next to NULL when it get merged

[Jason Xing]

On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 9:19 PM <kerneljasonxing@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Jason Xing <xingwanli@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Setting the @next of the last skb to NULL to prevent the panic in future
> when someone does something to the last of the gro list but its @next is
> invalid.
>
> For example, without the fix (commit: ece23711dd95), a panic could happen
> with the clsact loaded when skb is redirected and then validated in
> validate_xmit_skb_list() which could access the error addr of the @next
> of the last skb. Thus, "general protection fault" would appear after that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <xingwanli@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  net/core/skbuff.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
> index 2170bea..7b248f1 100644
> --- a/net/core/skbuff.c
> +++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
> @@ -4396,6 +4396,7 @@ int skb_gro_receive(struct sk_buff *p, struct sk_buff *skb)
>                 skb_shinfo(p)->frag_list = skb;
>         else
>                 NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->last->next = skb;
> +       skb->next = NULL;
>         NAPI_GRO_CB(p)->last = skb;

Besides, I'm a little bit confused that this operation inserts the
newest skb into the tail of the flow, so the tail of flow is the
newest, head oldest. The patch (commit: 600adc18) introduces the flush
of the oldest when the flow is full to lower the latency, but actually
it fetches the tail of the flow. Do I get something wrong here? I feel
it is really odd.

Thanks,
Jason

>         __skb_header_release(skb);
>         lp = p;
> --
> 1.8.3.1
>