From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2CFC2C52; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 12:37:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46A7D21DC4; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 06:37:33 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 05 Nov 2018 06:37:33 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=yee5UuXO9YRbj8LcrdezxOx7X7rTDB/c0rmFMRK9YoM=; b=NPBQL4Q6DeYL tEABdNK7Jeh7BcWpc/yluswZ+bBSBgSmPbs1nhU4B//eGWpz0HuCdorSZ2ZTw75Z I35ajhvNaYsSpeBvXetAaj/kqcJzUzS+T8Sk7kguTcZmAYOpbX3v2vtsBBc0WDuQ AT8QRdNzIXO8kPkC4BPi0Aui8eyWssY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=yee5UuXO9YRbj8LcrdezxOx7X7rTDB/c0rmFMRK9Y oM=; b=T1Ns3mtQob1yJq1m5m7+z6/FbzJ2acRcMe0iPG5+mb75iqPF0iQcWfmBY A5MFrUDnGjpxuHpVfmm5Qz8s09+wHzQ+qN9n7/dYhVlDZt0MHT8+RAErktiFOiyA C/Td+Mc9f2M+Ih7TOPD/nyflzgpPYXrhu95sL76mcnIvg5A2dgTkXjUCGczxFjDq iTAg979OPmLHnJgPOtc8uraVvmzkMKahXYbYQ4fj/wv7ovnmT8LJMN7jipbYrLiO YjmIag03nCKD+AvmC6x1u2Y1rI1i46kdGRoRDQrqqqEC+SSL54qCCJNB7U3qaKkK kfDpFFnjGhPkknJiCTA3Q5JQ+HUCA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0AC9F10323; Mon, 5 Nov 2018 06:37:31 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Konstantin Ananyev Cc: stable@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org, ryan.e.hall@intel.com, alexander.v.gutkin@intel.com Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 12:37:31 +0100 Message-ID: <1990999.tdZQoCF3K1@xps> In-Reply-To: <1541413603-4792-2-git-send-email-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> References: <1541413603-4792-1-git-send-email-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> <1541413603-4792-2-git-send-email-konstantin.ananyev@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH 1/2] ip_frag: check fragment length of incoming packet X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 05 Nov 2018 11:37:34 -0000 05/11/2018 11:26, Konstantin Ananyev: > Under some conditions ill-formed fragments might cause > reassembly code to corrupt mbufs and/or crash. > Let say the following fragments sequence: > > > > > can trigger the problem. > To overcome such situation, added check that fragment length > of incoming value is greater than zero. > > Reported-by: > Reported-by: Please, could you provide the full names? Note: it is usually inserted just before your Signed-off. > Fixes: 601e279df074 ("ip_frag: move fragmentation/reassembly headers into a library") > Fixes: 4f1a8f633862 ("ip_frag: add IPv6 reassembly") > Cc: stable@dpdk.org > > Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev