From: Joe Stringer
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:49:12 -0800
> Later parts of the stack (including fragmentation) expect that there is
> never a socket attached to frag in a frag_list, however this invariant
> was not enforced on all defrag paths. This could lead to the
>
On 25 January 2016 at 17:11, Joe Stringer wrote:
> On 22 January 2016 at 17:22, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On Fri, 2016-01-22 at 15:49 -0800, Joe Stringer wrote:
>>> Later parts of the stack (including fragmentation) expect that there is
>>> never a socket
On Mon, 2016-01-25 at 17:11 -0800, Joe Stringer wrote:
> Thanks, I can roll this into a v2 (or keep as a separate patch?). I
> got sidetracked on the IPv6 side, some other issues are blocking me on
> that but I intend to continue following up there as well.
No, don't worry, I will submit this in
On 22 January 2016 at 17:22, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2016-01-22 at 15:49 -0800, Joe Stringer wrote:
>> Later parts of the stack (including fragmentation) expect that there is
>> never a socket attached to frag in a frag_list, however this invariant
>> was not
Later parts of the stack (including fragmentation) expect that there is
never a socket attached to frag in a frag_list, however this invariant
was not enforced on all defrag paths. This could lead to the
BUG_ON(skb->sk) during ip_do_fragment(), as per the call stack at the
end of this commit
On Fri, 2016-01-22 at 15:49 -0800, Joe Stringer wrote:
> Later parts of the stack (including fragmentation) expect that there is
> never a socket attached to frag in a frag_list, however this invariant
> was not enforced on all defrag paths. This could lead to the
> BUG_ON(skb->sk) during