linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] SYSVIPC - Fix the ipc structures initialization

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: <491A7AAB.2070103@colorfullife.com>
Date:	Wed, 12 Nov 2008 07:41:47 +0100
From:	Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	cboulte@...il.com, Nadia.Derbey@...l.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SYSVIPC - Fix the ipc structures initialization

Andrew Morton wrote:
>> I don't understand what's going on... I hope I'm not the only one who
>> still get it because I doubt about this bug.
>>     
One thing is odd:
The test app uses fork(), two processes.
One process constantly does
    msgctl(0, IPC_STAT, &buf);

The other process creates a new msg queue, then it destroys it.
But: The probablity that the new queue has the msqid is 0 is tiny 
[impossible?].
That means the idr_find() call should [must?] fail.
But then the spin_lock() should never be executed. Why do you get an 
oops in that call?

Do you still use the test app that is on bugzilla?

>>     
>
> Time is starting to press on this one.  Is there something which we can
> revert which would fix this bug?
>
> Thanks.
>   

--
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/