Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
ipv6/udp: Use the correct variable to determine non-blocking condition
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
udpv6_recvmsg() function is not using the correct variable to determine
whether or not the socket is in non-blocking operation, this will lead
to unexpected behavior when a UDP checksum error occurs.

Consider a non-blocking udp receive scenario: when udpv6_recvmsg() is
called by sock_common_recvmsg(), MSG_DONTWAIT bit of flags variable in
udpv6_recvmsg() is cleared by "flags & ~MSG_DONTWAIT" in this call:

    err = sk->sk_prot->recvmsg(iocb, sk, msg, size, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT,
                   flags & ~MSG_DONTWAIT, &addr_len);

i.e. with udpv6_recvmsg() getting these values:

	int noblock = flags & MSG_DONTWAIT
	int flags = flags & ~MSG_DONTWAIT

So, when udp checksum error occurs, the execution will go to
csum_copy_err, and then the problem happens:

    csum_copy_err:
            ...............
            if (flags & MSG_DONTWAIT)
                    return -EAGAIN;
            goto try_again;
            ...............

But it will always go to try_again as MSG_DONTWAIT has been cleared
from flags at call time -- only noblock contains the original value
of MSG_DONTWAIT, so the test should be:

            if (noblock)
                    return -EAGAIN;

This is also consistent with what the ipv4/udp code does.

Signed-off-by: Xufeng Zhang <xufeng.zhang@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
  • Loading branch information
Xufeng Zhang authored and David S. Miller committed Jun 22, 2011
1 parent 58fa459 commit 32c9025
Showing 1 changed file with 1 addition and 1 deletion.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion net/ipv6/udp.c
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ int udpv6_recvmsg(struct kiocb *iocb, struct sock *sk,
}
unlock_sock_fast(sk, slow);

if (flags & MSG_DONTWAIT)
if (noblock)
return -EAGAIN;
goto try_again;
}
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 32c9025

Please sign in to comment.