linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/8] firmware: vpd: do not leave freed section attributes to the list

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 25 May 2017 18:50:17 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     Wei-Ning Huang <wnhuang@...gle.com>,
        Julius Werner <jwerner@...omium.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] firmware: vpd: do not leave freed section attributes
 to the list

On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 09:35:25AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 03:40:58PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 05:07:41PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > We should only add section attribute to the list of section attributes
> > > if we successfully created corresponding sysfs attribute.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 049a59db34eb ("firmware: Google VPD sysfs driver")
> > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
> > > Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/firmware/google/vpd.c | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > Next time, can you split this up into 2 series, one for the current
> > kernel, and the rest for the "next" release?  I've tried to split them
> > up myself here, hopefully it works...
> 
> OK, I will. It is just I did not consider either of issues serious
> enough so they could not wait for next release: failure to allocate tiny
> amounts of memory is impossible to trigger with current kernels. Same
> goes for the other patches. For example, one needs to not only manage to
> get sysfs attribute creation to fail, but also then unload the driver,
> to trigger the issue. Unlikely to happen in real life.

Ah, ok, that would have been good to know too :)