On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 02:57:31PM +0200, Alexandra Winter wrote:
>
>
> On 31.07.25 10:42, D. Wythe wrote:
> > BPF CI testing report a UAF issue:
> >
> [..]
> >
> > Fixes: 3b2dec2603d5 ("net/smc: restructure client and server code in af_smc")
> > Signed-off-by: D. Wythe <alibuda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > net/smc/af_smc.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
> > index 1882bab8e00e..dc72ff353813 100644
> > --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
> > +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
> > @@ -2568,8 +2568,9 @@ static void smc_listen_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > goto out_decl;
> > }
> >
> > - smc_listen_out_connected(new_smc);
> > SMC_STAT_SERV_SUCC_INC(sock_net(newclcsock->sk), ini);
> > + /* smc_listen_out() will release smcsk */
> > + smc_listen_out_connected(new_smc);
> > goto out_free;
> >
> > out_unlock:
>
>
> As this is a problem fix, you could send it directly to 'net'
> instead of including it to this series.
>
Hi Alexandra,
Yes, it should be sent to net. But the problem is that if I don't carry
this patch, the BPF CI test will always crash. Maybe I should send a
copy to both net and bpf-next? Do you have any suggestions?
Best wishes,
D. Wythe
> Reviewed-by: Alexandra Winter <wintera@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
