Re: [PATCH net] virtio-net: drop NETIF_F_FRAGLIST

On 08/04/2015 07:11 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > Hello. > > On 8/4/2015 12:55 PM, Jason Wang wrote: > >> virtio declares support for NETIF_F_FRAGLIST, but assumes >> that there are at most MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 2 fragments which isn't >> always true with a fraglist. > >> A longer fraglist in the skb wi

Re: [PATCH net] virtio-net: drop NETIF_F_FRAGLIST

Hello. On 8/4/2015 12:55 PM, Jason Wang wrote: virtio declares support for NETIF_F_FRAGLIST, but assumes that there are at most MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 2 fragments which isn't always true with a fraglist. A longer fraglist in the skb will make the call to skb_to_sgvec overflow the sg array, leading

Re: [PATCH net] virtio-net: drop NETIF_F_FRAGLIST

On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 05:55:45PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > virtio declares support for NETIF_F_FRAGLIST, but assumes > that there are at most MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 2 fragments which isn't > always true with a fraglist. > > A longer fraglist in the skb will make the call to skb_to_sgvec overflow > the

[PATCH net] virtio-net: drop NETIF_F_FRAGLIST

virtio declares support for NETIF_F_FRAGLIST, but assumes that there are at most MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 2 fragments which isn't always true with a fraglist. A longer fraglist in the skb will make the call to skb_to_sgvec overflow the sg array, leading to memory corruption. Drop NETIF_F_FRAGLIST so we on