bogus MSG_PEEK test in rxrpc_recvmsg()
Subsystems (3)
PATCH 1/1 bogus MSG_PEEK test in rxrpc_recvmsg()
[I would really like an ACK on that one from dhowells; it appears to be quite straightforward, but...]
MSG_PEEK isn't passed to ->recvmsg() via msg->msg_flags; as the matter of fact, neither the kernel users of rxrpc, nor the syscalls ever set that bit in there. It gets passed via flags; in fact, another such check in the same function is done correctly - as flags & MSG_PEEK.
It had been that way (effectively disabled) for 8 years, though, so the patch needs beating up - that case had never been tested. If it is correct, it's -stable fodder.
---
net/rxrpc/ar-recvmsg.c +1 -1
@@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ int rxrpc_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len,if (!skb) {/* nothing remains on the queue */ if (copied && - (msg->msg_flags &MSG_PEEK || timeo ==0 )) + (flags &MSG_PEEK || timeo ==0 )) goto out;/* wait for a message to turn up */
David Miller
maintainerFrom: Al Viro <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2015 05:34:56 +0000
Quoted 8 lines
[I would really like an ACK on that one from dhowells; it appears to be quite straightforward, but...]
MSG_PEEKisn't passed to ->recvmsg() viamsg->msg_flags; as the matter of fact, neither the kernel users of rxrpc, nor the syscalls ever set that bit in there. It gets passed via flags; in fact, another such check in the same function is done correctly - as flags &MSG_PEEK.
Quoted 5 lines
It had been that way (effectively disabled) for 8 years, though, so the patch needs beating up - that case had never been tested. If it is correct, it's -stable fodder.
Signed-off-by Al Viro <[email protected]>
Also applied and queued up for -stable, thanks Al.