On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 10:14:05AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 08:25:57 +0300 Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > Yeah I have seen that. Just as Jakub said, empty netlink attributes are valid
> > > (they are viewed as flag). The point is that different attribute has different
> > > length requirement. For this specific code, the RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_STAT_HWCOUNTERS
> > > attribute is a nested one whose inner attributes should be NLA_U32. But as you
> > > can see in variable nldev_policy, the description does not use nested policy to
> > > enfore that, which results in the bug discussed in my commit message.
> > >
> > > [RDMA_NLDEV_ATTR_STAT_HWCOUNTERS] = { .type = NLA_NESTED },
> > >
> > > The elegant fix could be add the nested policy description to nldev_policy while
> > > this is toublesome as no existing nla_attr has been given to this nested nlattr.
> > > Hence, add the length check is the simplest solution and you can see such nla_len
> > > check code all over the kernel.
> >
> > Right, and this is what bothers me.
> >
> > I would more than happy to change nla_for_each_nested() to be something
> > like nla_for_each_nested_type(...., sizeof(u32)), which will skip empty
> > lines, for code which can't have them.
>
> In general the idea of auto-skipping stuff kernel doesn't recognize
> is a bit old school. Better direction would be extending the policy
> validation to cover use cases for such loops.
I'm all in for any solution which will help for average developer to write
netlink code without mistakes.
Thanks
