diff mbox series

[net-next,v2,1/4] net: ipv6/addrconf: clamp preferred_lft to the maximum allowed

Message ID 20231024212312.299370-2-alexhenrie24@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted
Commit bfbf81b31093e0dc3d61b390a9bd0904d3bf5374
Delegated to: Netdev Maintainers
Headers show
Series net: ipv6/addrconf: ensure that temporary addresses' preferred lifetimes are in the valid range | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/series_format success Posting correctly formatted
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for net-next
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 1363 this patch: 1363
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 1 maintainers not CCed: edumazet@google.com
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 1388 this patch: 1388
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/deprecated_api success None detected
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 1388 this patch: 1388
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 7 lines checked
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0

Commit Message

Alex Henrie Oct. 24, 2023, 9:23 p.m. UTC
Without this patch, there is nothing to stop the preferred lifetime of a
temporary address from being greater than its valid lifetime. If that
was the case, the valid lifetime was effectively ignored.

Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
---
 net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

Comments

Jiri Pirko Oct. 25, 2023, 12:23 p.m. UTC | #1
Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 11:23:07PM CEST, alexhenrie24@gmail.com wrote:
>Without this patch, there is nothing to stop the preferred lifetime of a
>temporary address from being greater than its valid lifetime. If that
>was the case, the valid lifetime was effectively ignored.
>

Sounds like a bugfix, correct? In that case, could you please
provide a proper Fixes tag and target -net tree?


>Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
>---
> net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
>diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
>index c2d471ad7922..26aedaab3647 100644
>--- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
>+++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
>@@ -1399,6 +1399,7 @@ static int ipv6_create_tempaddr(struct inet6_ifaddr *ifp, bool block)
> 			      idev->cnf.temp_valid_lft + age);
> 	cfg.preferred_lft = cnf_temp_preferred_lft + age - idev->desync_factor;
> 	cfg.preferred_lft = min_t(__u32, ifp->prefered_lft, cfg.preferred_lft);
>+	cfg.preferred_lft = min_t(__u32, cfg.valid_lft, cfg.preferred_lft);
> 
> 	cfg.plen = ifp->prefix_len;
> 	tmp_tstamp = ifp->tstamp;
>-- 
>2.42.0
>
>
Alex Henrie Oct. 25, 2023, 4:28 p.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>
> Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 11:23:07PM CEST, alexhenrie24@gmail.com wrote:
> >Without this patch, there is nothing to stop the preferred lifetime of a
> >temporary address from being greater than its valid lifetime. If that
> >was the case, the valid lifetime was effectively ignored.
> >
>
> Sounds like a bugfix, correct? In that case, could you please
> provide a proper Fixes tag and target -net tree?

Paolo requested no Fixes tag, and Jakub seemed to agree:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/60d9d5f57fdb55a27748996d807712c680c4e7f9.camel@redhat.com/

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230830182852.175e0ac2@kernel.org/

Which is fine by me. These changes are not important enough to backport.

-Alex
David Ahern Oct. 26, 2023, 12:41 a.m. UTC | #3
On 10/24/23 3:23 PM, Alex Henrie wrote:
> Without this patch, there is nothing to stop the preferred lifetime of a
> temporary address from being greater than its valid lifetime. If that
> was the case, the valid lifetime was effectively ignored.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
> ---
>  net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 

Reviewed-by: David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>
Jiri Pirko Oct. 26, 2023, 5:11 a.m. UTC | #4
Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 06:28:00PM CEST, alexhenrie24@gmail.com wrote:
>On Wed, Oct 25, 2023 at 6:23 AM Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us> wrote:
>>
>> Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 11:23:07PM CEST, alexhenrie24@gmail.com wrote:
>> >Without this patch, there is nothing to stop the preferred lifetime of a
>> >temporary address from being greater than its valid lifetime. If that
>> >was the case, the valid lifetime was effectively ignored.
>> >
>>
>> Sounds like a bugfix, correct? In that case, could you please
>> provide a proper Fixes tag and target -net tree?
>
>Paolo requested no Fixes tag, and Jakub seemed to agree:
>
>https://lore.kernel.org/all/60d9d5f57fdb55a27748996d807712c680c4e7f9.camel@redhat.com/

Okay, makes sense.

Reviewed-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
index c2d471ad7922..26aedaab3647 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
@@ -1399,6 +1399,7 @@  static int ipv6_create_tempaddr(struct inet6_ifaddr *ifp, bool block)
 			      idev->cnf.temp_valid_lft + age);
 	cfg.preferred_lft = cnf_temp_preferred_lft + age - idev->desync_factor;
 	cfg.preferred_lft = min_t(__u32, ifp->prefered_lft, cfg.preferred_lft);
+	cfg.preferred_lft = min_t(__u32, cfg.valid_lft, cfg.preferred_lft);
 
 	cfg.plen = ifp->prefix_len;
 	tmp_tstamp = ifp->tstamp;