From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
To: Zihan Xi <zihanx@nebusec.ai>,
davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org,
pabeni@redhat.com, dsahern@kernel.org, idosch@nvidia.com
Cc: zihanx@nebusec.ai, horms@kernel.org, kees@kernel.org,
willemb@google.com, kuniyu@google.com,
richardbgobert@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v5 1/1] net: gso: limit recursive IP-in-IP segmentation
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2026 11:26:53 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <willemdebruijn.kernel.36edefe3b0b17@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8b7e7dad82a40e7bdb4721516823c8a7ae6106a0.1790161599.git.zihanx@nebusec.ai>
Zihan Xi wrote:
> IP-in-IP GSO can re-enter inet_gso_segment() or ipv6_gso_segment()
> for each nested IP header. encap_level tracks header bytes, not callback
> depth, so a deep chain can exhaust the kernel stack. Making
> inet_gso_segment() stackable introduced unbounded IPv4 nesting; IPIP
> GSO/TSO later made the path reachable. The IPv6 stackable path was
> introduced separately and shares the guard; Fixes identifies the IPv4
> root cause.
>
> Count IPv4 and IPv6 GSO handler entries in skb_gso_cb, initialized once
> per top-level GSO operation and preserved across GRE/UDP context changes.
> Set the cap to five, matching IP_TUNNEL_RECURSION_LIMIT. Allow five
> entries and reject the sixth with -EINVAL before it can dispatch another
> GSO callback.
>
> On the patched x86_64 kernel, tracefs observed six
> inet_gso_segment() entries for the 199-header reproducer; the sixth
> returned -EINVAL without a stack-guard fault. This validates the tested
> configuration, not an architecture-independent stack-safety margin.
>
> Fixes: 3347c9602955 ("ipv4: gso: make inet_gso_segment() stackable")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Reported-by: Vega <vega@nebusec.ai>
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Co-developed-by: Luxing Yin <root@tr0jan.top>
> Signed-off-by: Luxing Yin <root@tr0jan.top>
> Signed-off-by: Zihan Xi <zihanx@nebusec.ai>
> ---
> changes in v5:
> - Replace the header-offset budget with a shared IP GSO handler-entry
> counter. Entries one through five pass; entry six is rejected.
> - Initialize the count for each top-level GSO operation and preserve it
> across IPv4/IPv6 dispatch and GRE/UDP context changes.
> - Use the existing IP_TUNNEL_RECURSION_LIMIT value of five as a
> practical bound. Tracefs observed the sixth entry return -EINVAL on
> the final x86_64 revision; rerun both IPv4 PoCs on that revision.
> - Avoid rejecting a single-level tunnel based only on header length.
> - v4 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1790041241.git.zihanx@nebusec.ai/
> include/net/gso.h | 9 +++++++++
> net/core/gso.c | 1 +
> net/ipv4/af_inet.c | 2 ++
> net/ipv6/ip6_offload.c | 2 ++
> 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/gso.h b/include/net/gso.h
> index 29975440c..18944ff06 100644
> --- a/include/net/gso.h
> +++ b/include/net/gso.h
> @@ -19,10 +19,19 @@ struct skb_gso_cb {
> int encap_level;
> __wsum csum;
> __u16 csum_start;
> + /* Number of IPv4/IPv6 GSO handler entries for this packet. */
> + u8 recursion_counter;
> };
> #define SKB_GSO_CB_OFFSET 32
> #define SKB_GSO_CB(skb) ((struct skb_gso_cb *)((skb)->cb + SKB_GSO_CB_OFFSET))
>
> +#define GSO_RECURSION_LIMIT 5
The commit-msg explains this as derived from IP_TUNNEL_RECURSION_LIMIT.
Which makes sense as a choice. Use that directly, rather than
duplicating it?
Or else at least add a comment. Right now it looks like an unexplained
magic variable.
If respinning, no need to send the long cover letter again, imho.
Reported-by: is expected to be followed by a Closes: tag. That can
point to the v5 cover letter on lore.kernel.org.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-23 15:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-23 14:01 [PATCH net v5 0/1] " Zihan Xi
2026-09-23 14:01 ` [PATCH net v5 1/1] " Zihan Xi
2026-09-23 15:26 ` Willem de Bruijn [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=willemdebruijn.kernel.36edefe3b0b17@gmail.com \
--to=willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=idosch@nvidia.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=richardbgobert@gmail.com \
--cc=willemb@google.com \
--cc=zihanx@nebusec.ai \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®