提交 fbcf85b0 编写于 作者: G Guillaume Nault 提交者: Greg Kroah-Hartman

tcp: Protect accesses to .ts_recent_stamp with {READ,WRITE}_ONCE()

[ Upstream commit 721c8dafad26ccfa90ff659ee19755e3377b829d ]

Syncookies borrow the ->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp field to store the
timestamp of the last synflood. Protect them with READ_ONCE() and
WRITE_ONCE() since reads and writes aren't serialised.

Use of .rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp for storing the synflood timestamp was
introduced by a0f82f64 ("syncookies: remove last_synq_overflow from
struct tcp_sock"). But unprotected accesses were already there when
timestamp was stored in .last_synq_overflow.

Fixes: 1da177e4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
Signed-off-by: NGuillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: NEric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: NGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
上级 4b8a9869
......@@ -492,9 +492,9 @@ static inline void tcp_synq_overflow(const struct sock *sk)
}
}
last_overflow = tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp;
last_overflow = READ_ONCE(tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp);
if (!time_between32(now, last_overflow, last_overflow + HZ))
tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp = now;
WRITE_ONCE(tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp, now);
}
/* syncookies: no recent synqueue overflow on this listening socket? */
......@@ -515,7 +515,7 @@ static inline bool tcp_synq_no_recent_overflow(const struct sock *sk)
}
}
last_overflow = tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp;
last_overflow = READ_ONCE(tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp);
/* If last_overflow <= jiffies <= last_overflow + TCP_SYNCOOKIE_VALID,
* then we're under synflood. However, we have to use
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册