linux-kernel - Re: kernel segv with 2.6.31-rc6 ?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:48:52 +0930
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>
Cc:	Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
	"linux-parisc" <linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org>,
	Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
	"linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: kernel segv with 2.6.31-rc6 ?

On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 08:19:36 am James Bottomley wrote:
> The root cause is a duplicate section name (.text); is this legal?

I'd be happy to fail to load it.  There might be sysfs issues with it
too.

> However, there's a problem with commit
> 6d76013381ed28979cd122eb4b249a88b5e384fa in that if you fail to allocate
> a mod->sect_attrs (in this case it's null because of the duplication),
> it still gets used without checking in add_notes_attrs()
> 
> This should fix it

No, the real problem is that it ignores failure.  I'd much rather fail
the module load than various features mysteriously MIA.

Which brings us to "patches which don't go thru the maintainer" (or
perhaps, non-responsive maintainers who get bypassed).

Thanks,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/