Re: [PATCH net v2] bridge: mrp: reject zero test interval to avoid OOM panic
Xiang Mei <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.network.bridge,gmane.linux.network |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAPpSM+R5pM_X2_dbWvvpUn-MvZtqiLEXbmotnEQf+5DvPjxumw@mail.gmail.com> |
Thanks for the quick review. On Fri, Mar 27, 2026 at 11:44 PM Nikolay Aleksandrov <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 28/03/2026 08:30, Xiang Mei wrote: > > br_mrp_start_test() and br_mrp_start_in_test() accept the user-supplied > > interval value from netlink without validation. When interval is 0, > > usecs_to_jiffies(0) yields 0, causing the delayed work > > (br_mrp_test_work_expired / br_mrp_in_test_work_expired) to reschedule > > itself with zero delay. This creates a tight loop on system_percpu_wq > > that allocates and transmits MRP test frames at maximum rate, exhausting > > all system memory and causing a kernel panic via OOM deadlock. > > > > The same zero-interval issue applies to br_mrp_start_in_test_parse() > > for interconnect test frames. > > > > Use NLA_POLICY_MIN(NLA_U32, 1) in the nla_policy tables for both > > IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_INTERVAL and > > IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_IN_TEST_INTERVAL, so zero is rejected at the > > netlink attribute parsing layer before the value ever reaches the > > workqueue scheduling code. This is consistent with how other bridge > > subsystems (br_fdb, br_mst) enforce range constraints on netlink > > attributes. > > > > Fixes: 20f6a05ef635 ("bridge: mrp: Rework the MRP netlink interface") > > Fixes: 7ab1748e4ce6 ("bridge: mrp: Extend MRP netlink interface for configuring MRP interconnect") > > Reported-by: Weiming Shi <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Xiang Mei <[email protected]> > > --- > > net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c b/net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c > > index ce6f63c77cc0..86f0e75d6e34 100644 > > --- a/net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c > > +++ b/net/bridge/br_mrp_netlink.c > > @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ static const struct nla_policy > > br_mrp_start_test_policy[IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_MAX + 1] = { > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_UNSPEC] = { .type = NLA_REJECT }, > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_RING_ID] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > - [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_INTERVAL] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > + [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_INTERVAL] = NLA_POLICY_MIN(NLA_U32, 1), > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_MAX_MISS] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_PERIOD] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_TEST_MONITOR] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ static const struct nla_policy > > br_mrp_start_in_test_policy[IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_IN_TEST_MAX + 1] = { > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_IN_TEST_UNSPEC] = { .type = NLA_REJECT }, > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_IN_TEST_IN_ID] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > - [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_IN_TEST_INTERVAL] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > + [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_IN_TEST_INTERVAL] = NLA_POLICY_MIN(NLA_U32, 1), > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_IN_TEST_MAX_MISS] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > [IFLA_BRIDGE_MRP_START_IN_TEST_PERIOD] = { .type = NLA_U32 }, > > }; > > Alright, let's limit them :-) > > Acked-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <[email protected]> >