linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Make kthread_stop() not oops when passed a bad pointer

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: <4898785E.1010702@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date:	Tue, 05 Aug 2008 17:57:18 +0200
From:	Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To:	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make kthread_stop() not oops when passed a bad pointer

Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> --- a/kernel/kthread.c
> +++ b/kernel/kthread.c
> @@ -201,6 +201,9 @@ int kthread_stop(struct task_struct *k)
>  {
>  	int ret;
>  
> +	if (!k || IS_ERR(k))
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
>  	mutex_lock(&kthread_stop_lock);
>  
>  	/* It could exit after stop_info.k set, but before wake_up_process. */

Would
	if (WARN_ON(!k || IS_ERR(k)))

be in order, or are there valid cases of passing an invalid pointer?
-- 
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--- =--- --=-=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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/