On 7/30/21 4:48 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> 2755 /* Got a complete packet yet? */
>> 2756 if (lost == 0 && (PPP_MP_CB(p)->BEbits & E) &&
>> 2757 (PPP_MP_CB(head)->BEbits & B)) {
>> 2758 if (len > ppp->mrru + 2) {
>> 2759 ++ppp->dev->stats.rx_length_errors;
>> 2760 netdev_printk(KERN_DEBUG, ppp->dev,
>> 2761 "PPP: reconstructed packet"
>> 2762 " is too long (%d)\n", len);
>> 2763 } else {
>> 2764 tail = p;
>> ^^^^^^^^
>> tail is set to p.
>
> At this point Smatch understands that "tail" and "p" are non-NULL.
Yep. And 'head' is non-NULL and points to the first buf of the
reassembled packet, 'tail' is non-NULL and points to the last buf of the
reassembled packet. And head may be equal to tail if it's packet
consisting of a single MP fragment. And because 'lost' is zero, we know
that we have all of the intermediate fragments chained as well. It's a
complete message.
>> 2793 /* If we have a complete packet, copy it all into one skb. */
>> 2794 if (tail != NULL) {
>
> This condition means "tail == p"
True at this point. (Not real meaningful, as we'll see in a bit, but
true nonetheless.)
>> 2795 /* If we have discarded any fragments,
>> 2796 signal a receive error. */
>> 2797 if (PPP_MP_CB(head)->sequence != ppp->nextseq) {
>
> Smatch is supposed to "understand" condtions, but this one is quite
> complicated and the only thing that Smatch understands is just the
> basic meaning that these two are not equal.
That's ok; it's a worthwhile branch to explore, so we can assume it's true.
>> 2798 skb_queue_walk_safe(list, p, tmp) {
>> 2799 if (p == head)
>
> One of the weak points of Smatch is how it parses lists... Also it
> doesn't have any implications for this if (p == head) condition.
This is where things break down. That queue walker macro on line 2798
re-assigns 'p'. The code marches over the list and says "anything that
still exists up to (but not including) the head for this completed
packet is trash." Note that *NOTHING* here is harming 'head' or
anything in the list that follows that buffer -- which includes 'tail.'
>> 2800 break;
That break protects us from hurting 'tail'.
>> 2801 if (ppp->debug & 1)
>> 2802 netdev_printk(KERN_DEBUG, ppp->dev,
>> 2803 "discarding frag %u\n",
>> 2804 PPP_MP_CB(p)->sequence);
>> 2805 __skb_unlink(p, list);
>> 2806 kfree_skb(p);
>
> We know that p == tail going in to the start of this list so this is
> going to free tail. Of course kfree_skb() is refcounted and the free
> only happens when the last reference is dropped.
Not so. p != tail here. It cannot possibly be tail, because we (A)
reassigned 'p' at the top of the loop and (B) broke out of the loop on
hitting 'head'.
>> 2836 } else {
>> 2837 __skb_unlink(skb, list);
>> 2838 }
>> 2839
>> --> 2840 ppp->nextseq = PPP_MP_CB(tail)->sequence + 1;
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Here is where Smatch complains.
If that's Smatch's analysis of the situation, then Smatch is wrong.
It's a bogus warning.
--
James Carlson 42.703N 71.076W <carlsonj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
