On Sun, Jan 17, 2021 at 03:10:32PM +0000, Wei Liu wrote: > On Sat, Jan 16, 2021 at 02:02:01PM +0100, Andrea Parri wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 08:30:22PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Thu, 14 Jan 2021 21:26:28 +0100 Andrea Parri (Microsoft) wrote: > > > > For additional robustness in the face of Hyper-V errors or malicious > > > > behavior, validate all values that originate from packets that Hyper-V > > > > has sent to the guest. Ensure that invalid values cannot cause indexing > > > > off the end of an array, or subvert an existing validation via integer > > > > overflow. Ensure that outgoing packets do not have any leftover guest > > > > memory that has not been zeroed out. > > > > > > > > Reported-by: Juan Vazquez <juvazq@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri (Microsoft) <parri.andrea@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@xxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@xxxxxx> > > > > Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> > > > > Cc: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: KP Singh <kpsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > Cc: bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > > --- > > > > Applies to 5.11-rc3 (and hyperv-next). > > > > > > So this is for hyperv-next or should we take it via netdev trees? > > > > No preference, either way is good for me. > > To be clear: There is no dependency on any patch in hyperv-next, right? > > That's my understanding, but I would like to confirm it. Well, I wrote that this *applies* to hyperv-next... but that's indeed the only 'dependency' I can think of. Hope this helps. Thanks, Andrea
