Hello Eric, On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 4:01 PM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 6/7/24 23:32, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > > From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx> > > Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 09:14:04 -0700 > >> On Fri, Jun 07, 2024 at 01:27:47AM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > >>> Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>> From: Cong Wang <cong.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> > >>>> Commit 219eee9c0d16 ("net: skbuff: add overflow debug check to pull/push > >>>> helpers") introduced an overflow debug check for pull/push helpers. > >>>> For __skb_pull() this makes sense because its callers rarely check its > >>>> return value. But for pskb_may_pull() it does not make sense, since its > >>>> return value is properly taken care of. Remove the one in > >>>> pskb_may_pull(), we can continue rely on its return value. > >>> See 025f8ad20f2e3264d11683aa9cbbf0083eefbdcd which would not exist > >>> without this check, I would not give up yet. > >> What's the point of that commit? > > 4b911a9690d7 would be better example. The warning actually found a > > bug in NSH GSO. > > > > Here's splats triggered by syzkaller using NSH over various tunnels. > > https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20240415222041.18537-2-kuniyu@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > > Right. We discussed this before. I guess I forgot to send the fix. > > Florian could you submit the suggestion I made before ? > > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c > index > 358870408a51e61f3cbc552736806e4dfee1ec39..da7aae6fd8ba557c66699d1cfebd47f18f442aa2 > 100644 > --- a/net/core/filter.c > +++ b/net/core/filter.c > @@ -1662,6 +1662,11 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct bpf_scratchpad, bpf_sp); > static inline int __bpf_try_make_writable(struct sk_buff *skb, > unsigned int write_len) > { > +#if defined(CONFIG_DEBUG_NET) I wonder why we want to avoid printing warning information especially when CONFIG_DEBUG_NET is on? Any reasons? > + /* Avoid a splat in pskb_may_pull_reason() */ > + if (write_len > INT_MAX) I guess: if the purpose is to skip pskb_may_pull_reason and then return a proper value (-EINVAL) to its caller when the above statement is true, can we add the warning here on top of you patch: DEBUG_NET_WARN_ON_ONCE(len > INT_MAX); ? After this, we can print useful information and let the caller catch the -EINVAL return value. Thanks, Jason > + return -EINVAL; > +#endif > return skb_ensure_writable(skb, write_len); > } > > >