: IPv4 vs IPv6 addresses mess in sctp_inet[6]addr_event.

PATCH New Pavel Emelyanov 1 participant 1 message Apr 9, 2008

Subsystems (3)

Networking Network drivers SCTP protocol

lore

Share & tools

lore

Pavel Emelyanov

author

2008-04-09 14:22 UTC #0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 : IPv4 vs IPv6 addresses mess in sctp_inet[6]addr_event.

All IP addresses that are present in a system are duplicated on struct sctp_sockaddr_entry. They are linked in the global list called sctp_local_addr_list. And this struct unions IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.

So, there can be rare case, when a sockaddr_in.sin_addr coincides with the corresponding part of the sockaddr_in6 and the notifier for IPv4 will carry away an IPv6 entry.

The fix is to check the family before comparing the addresses.

Signed-off-by Pavel Emelyanov <[email protected]>

---

net/sctp/ipv6.c +3 -2

index b1e05d7..85f1495 100644
@@ -110,8 +110,9 @@ static int sctp_inet6addr_event(struct notifier_block *this, unsigned long ev,
 		spin_lock_bh(&sctp_local_addr_lock);
 		list_for_each_entry_safe(addr, temp,
 					&sctp_local_addr_list, list) {
-			if (ipv6_addr_equal(&addr->a.v6.sin6_addr,
-					     &ifa->addr)) {
+			if (addr->a.sa.sa_family == AF_INET6 &&
+					ipv6_addr_equal(&addr->a.v6.sin6_addr,
+						&ifa->addr)) {
 				found = 1;
 				addr->valid = 0;
 				list_del_rcu(&addr->list);

net/sctp/protocol.c +3 -1

index f90091a..c2dd65d 100644
@@ -647,7 +647,9 @@ static int sctp_inetaddr_event(struct notifier_block *this, unsigned long ev,
 		spin_lock_bh(&sctp_local_addr_lock);
 		list_for_each_entry_safe(addr, temp,
 					&sctp_local_addr_list, list) {
-			if (addr->a.v4.sin_addr.s_addr == ifa->ifa_local) {
+			if (addr->a.sa.sa_family == AF_INET &&
+					addr->a.v4.sin_addr.s_addr ==
+					ifa->ifa_local) {
 				found = 1;
 				addr->valid = 0;
 				list_del_rcu(&addr->list);