David Howells wrote:
> Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > __ip6_append_data probably needs the same.
>
> Now that's interesting. __ip6_append_data() has a check for this and returns
> -EINVAL in this case:
>
> copy = datalen - transhdrlen - fraggap - pagedlen;
> if (copy < 0) {
> err = -EINVAL;
> goto error;
> }
>
> but should I bypass that check for MSG_SPLICE_PAGES? It hits the check when
> it should be able to get past it. The code seems to go back to prehistoric
> times, so I'm not sure why it's there.
Argh, saved by inconsistency between the two stacks.
I don't immediately understand the race that caused this code to move,
in commit 232cd35d0804 ("ipv6: fix out of bound writes in __ip6_append_data()").
Maybe a race with a mtu update?
Technically there is no Fixes tag to apply, so this would not be a fix
for net.
If we want equivalent behavior, a patch removing this branch is probably
best sent to net-next, in a way that works from the start.
