linux-kernel - Re: + sysctl-add-proc_dointvec_unsigned-handler-update.patch added to -mm tree

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:	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:52:13 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
Cc:	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com
Subject: Re: + sysctl-add-proc_dointvec_unsigned-handler-update.patch added
 to -mm tree

On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:51:50 +0800
Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 1:19 AM, Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:45 PM,  <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >> --- a/kernel/sysctl.c~sysctl-add-proc_dointvec_unsigned-handler-update
> >> +++ a/kernel/sysctl.c
> >> @@ -2515,6 +2515,7 @@ int proc_dointvec_unsigned(struct ctl_ta
> >>  {
> >>        struct do_proc_dointvec_minmax_conv_param param = {
> >>                .min = &zero,
> >> +               .max = (int *) table->extra2,
> >>        };
> >>        return do_proc_dointvec(table, write, buffer, lenp, ppos,
> >>                                do_proc_dointvec_minmax_conv, &param);
> >
> > This is still buggybecause "zero" is only 1 variable and max can be an array.
> > Sysctl boundary comparisons are done element-by-element.
> 
> Where's the array use case?

Guys, these patches:

sysctl-add-proc_dointvec_bool-handler.patch
sysctl-use-proc_dointvec_bool-where-appropriate.patch
sysctl-add-proc_dointvec_unsigned-handler.patch
sysctl-add-proc_dointvec_unsigned-handler-update.patch
sysctl-use-proc_dointvec_unsigned-where-appropriate.patch

are still floating about in my tree, and stuck.

As everyone has forgotten all about it I think I'll just drop the
patches.  If you're still motivated, please resend from scratch and
let's take another look at them.  And this time please let's drive the
discussion to a conclusion and not leave stuff floating around
unresolved for months?

--
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/