linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] common: exit -->

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]

Message-ID: <877c3vzu5p.fsf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2025 00:16:42 +0530
From: Ritesh Harjani (IBM) <ritesh.list@...il.com>
To: Zorro Lang <zlang@...hat.com>
Cc: "Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" <nirjhar.roy.lists@...il.com>, fstests@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, ojaswin@...ux.ibm.com, djwong@...nel.org, zlang@...nel.org, david@...morbit.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] common: exit --> _exit

Zorro Lang <zlang@...hat.com> writes:

> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 10:34:47AM +0530, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
>> "Nirjhar Roy (IBM)" <nirjhar.roy.lists@...il.com> writes:
>> 
>> > Replace exit <return-val> with _exit <return-val> which
>> > is introduced in the previous patch.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Nirjhar Roy (IBM) <nirjhar.roy.lists@...il.com>
<...>
>> > ---
>> > @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ _filter_bmap()
>> >  die_now()
>> >  {
>> >  	status=1
>> > -	exit
>> > +	_exit
>> 
>> Why not remove status=1 too and just do _exit 1 here too?
>> Like how we have done at other places?
>
> Yeah, nice catch! As the defination of _exit:
>
>   _exit()
>   {
>        status="$1"
>        exit "$status"
>   }
>
> The
>   "
>   status=1
>   exit
>   "
> should be equal to:
>   "
>   _exit 1
>   "
>
> And "_exit" looks not make sense, due to it gives null to status.
>
> Same problem likes below:
>
>
> @@ -3776,7 +3773,7 @@ _get_os_name()
>                 echo 'linux'
>         else
>                 echo Unknown operating system: `uname`
> -               exit
> +               _exit
>
>
> The "_exit" without argument looks not make sense.
>

That's right. _exit called with no argument could make status as null.
To prevent such misuse in future, should we add a warning/echo message
if the no. of arguments passed to _exit() is not 1? 

-ritesh