@@ -501,9 +501,9 @@ static inline void tcp_synq_overflow(const struct sock *sk)
}
}
- last_overflow = tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp;
+ last_overflow = READ_ONCE(tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp);
if (!time_between32(now, last_overflow, last_overflow + HZ))
- tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp = now;
+ WRITE_ONCE(tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp, now);
}
/* syncookies: no recent synqueue overflow on this listening socket? */
@@ -524,7 +524,7 @@ static inline bool tcp_synq_no_recent_overflow(const struct sock *sk)
}
}
- last_overflow = tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp;
+ last_overflow = READ_ONCE(tcp_sk(sk)->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp);
/* If last_overflow <= jiffies <= last_overflow + TCP_SYNCOOKIE_VALID,
* then we're under synflood. However, we have to use
Syncookies borrow the ->rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp field to store the timestamp of the last synflood. Protect them with READ_ONCE() and WRITE_ONCE() since reads and writes aren't serialised. Use of .rx_opt.ts_recent_stamp for storing the synflood timestamp was introduced by a0f82f64e269 ("syncookies: remove last_synq_overflow from struct tcp_sock"). But unprotected accesses were already there when timestamp was stored in .last_synq_overflow. Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2") Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> --- include/net/tcp.h | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)