Willem, On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 09:53:58AM GMT, Willem de Bruijn wrote: > Christian Heusel wrote: > > On 24/08/14 10:10AM, Adrian Vladu wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > The 6.6.y branch has the patch already in the stable queue -> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git/commit/?id=3e713b73c01fac163a5c8cb0953d1e300407a773, and it should be available in the 6.6.46 upcoming minor. > > > > > > Thanks, Adrian. > > > > Yeah it's also queued up for 6.10, which I both missed (sorry for that!). > > If I'm able to properly backport the patch for 6.1 I'll send that one, > > but my hopes are not too high that this will work .. > > There are two conflicts. > > The one in include/linux/virtio_net.h is resolved by first backporting > commit fc8b2a6194693 ("net: more strict VIRTIO_NET_HDR_GSO_UDP_L4 > validation") > > We did not backport that to stable because there was some slight risk > that applications might be affected. This has not surfaced. > > The conflict in net/ipv4/udp_offload.c is not so easy to address. > There were lots of patches between v6.1 and linus/master, with far > fewer of these betwee v6.1 and linux-stable/linux-6.1.y. BTW, we successfully cherry-picked 3 suggested[1] commits over v6.1.105 in ALT, and there is no reported problems as of yet. 89add40066f9 ("net: drop bad gso csum_start and offset in virtio_net_hdr") fc8b2a619469 ("net: more strict VIRTIO_NET_HDR_GSO_UDP_L4 validation") 9840036786d9 ("gso: fix dodgy bit handling for GSO_UDP_L4") [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/2024081147-altitude-luminous-19d1@gregkh/ Thanks, > > We can also avoid the backport of fc8b2a6194693 and construct a custom > version for this older kernel. All this is needed in virtio_net.h is > > + case SKB_GSO_UDP_L4: > + case SKB_GSO_TCPV4: > + case SKB_GSO_TCPV6: > + if (skb->csum_offset != offsetof(struct tcphdr, check)) > > and in __udp_gso_segment > > + if (unlikely(skb_checksum_start(gso_skb) != > + skb_transport_header(gso_skb))) > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > + > > The Fixes tag points to a commit introduced in 6.1. 6.6 is queued up, > so this is the only release for which we have to create a custom > patch, right? > > Let me know if you will send this, or I should? >
