On 25/05/2020 12:55, Horatiu Vultur wrote:
> The issue was reported by syzbot. When the function br_mrp_parse was
> called with a valid net_bridge_port, the net_bridge was an invalid
> pointer. Therefore the check br->stp_enabled could pass/fail
> depending where it was pointing in memory.
> The fix consists of setting the net_bridge pointer if the port is a
> valid pointer.
>
> Reported-by: syzbot+9c6f0f1f8e32223df9a4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Fixes: 6536993371fa ("bridge: mrp: Integrate MRP into the bridge")
> Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c | 6 ++++++
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c b/net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c
> index 397e7f710772a..4a08a99519b04 100644
> --- a/net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c
> +++ b/net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,12 @@ int br_mrp_parse(struct net_bridge *br, struct net_bridge_port *p,
> struct nlattr *tb[IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_MAX + 1];
> int err;
>
> + /* When this function is called for a port then the br pointer is
> + * invalid, therefor set the br to point correctly
> + */
> + if (p)
> + br = p->br;
> +
> if (br->stp_enabled != BR_NO_STP) {
> NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "MRP can't be enabled if STP is already enabled");
> return -EINVAL;
>
You should tag the fix for net-next when it's intended for it.
Acked-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
