On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 03:24:32PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 09:20:59PM +0800, Mao Wenan wrote: > > There are five patches to fix CVE-2018-5390 in latest mainline > > branch, but only two patches exist in stable 4.4 and 3.18: > > dc6ae4d tcp: detect malicious patterns in tcp_collapse_ofo_queue() > > 5fbec48 tcp: avoid collapses in tcp_prune_queue() if possible > > but I have tested with these patches, and found the cpu usage was very high. > > test results: > > with fix patch： 78.2% ksoftirqd > > no fix patch： 90% ksoftirqd > > > > After analysing the codes of stable 4.4, and debuging the > > system, the search of ofo_queue(tcp ofo using a simple queue) cost more > > cycles. > > So I think only two patches can't fix the CVE-2018-5390. > > So I try to backport "tcp: use an RB tree for ooo receive queue" using RB > > tree > > instead of simple queue, then backport Eric Dumazet 5 fixed patches in > > mainline, > > good news is that ksoftirqd is turn to about 20%, which is the same with > > mainline now. > > Thanks for doing this work, I had some questions on the individual > patches. Can you address them and resend?
Also, always cc: the stable@vger list when sending stable patches so that others can review and comment on them. thanks, greg k-h
