On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 09:52:32AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 2026 at 10:17:31AM +0530, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, May 21, 2026 at 03:15:54PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 17, 2026 at 09:33:06AM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
> > > > > > What's the status of that fix?
> > > > >
> > > > > Stefano posted v3 and is working on v4.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Should it be reverted elsewhere?
> > > > >
> > > > > Donnu. With the change we have no DoS but the socket gets silently
> > > > > broken. Eric felt given the brokenness is upstream already it's
> > > > > better
> > > > > to work on a fix on top, not revert.
> > > >
> > > > Dropped from the 6.6, 6.12, 6.18, and 7.0 queues. We'll pick up
> > > > Stefano's
> > > > follow-up once it lands upstream.
> > >
> > > FYI v4 is now merged in the net tree, so I guess they will land upstream
> > > soon. I CCed stable on both patches:
> > >
> > > a4f0b001782b ("vsock/virtio: reset connection on receiving queue
> > > overflow")
> > > c6087c5aaad6 ("vsock/virtio: fix skb overhead accounting to preserve full
> > > buf_alloc")
> > >
> > > Both are related, but the second is the main fix of this patch.
> >
> > THe second one doesn't apply at all :(
> >
>
> The second one is the fix of the patch originally added to stable queue by
> this thread, so should be applied on top of it (commit 059b7dbd20a6
> ("vsock/virtio: fix potential unbounded skb queue")).
>
> I'm working on improving memory management, but for now I think it makes
> sense to backport all three to the stable branches.
>
> So, in summary:
> 059b7dbd20a6 ("vsock/virtio: fix potential unbounded skb queue")
> a4f0b001782b ("vsock/virtio: reset connection on receiving queue overflow")
> c6087c5aaad6 ("vsock/virtio: fix skb overhead accounting to preserve full
> buf_alloc")
Again, this last one fails to apply everywhere :(
thanks,
greg k-h
