linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fix error handling in load

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: <200909212030.03648.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:30:03 +0930
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix error handling in load_module()

On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 06:44:30 am Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 7 Sep 2009 19:45:58 +0530
> Kamalesh Babulal <kamalesh@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > Once the percpu_modalloc fails, percpu_modfree(mod->refptr) is called on a NULL pointer.
> > We try calling it on a NULL pointer. The following patch fixes the problem by introducing 
> > a check for mod->refptr before calling percpu_modfree.
> 
> Where did it crash and why did it crash?  That trace is pretty unclear.
> 
> > diff --git a/kernel/module.c b/kernel/module.c
> > index 2d53718..7f89258 100644
> > --- a/kernel/module.c
> > +++ b/kernel/module.c
> > @@ -2379,7 +2379,8 @@ static noinline struct module *load_module(void __user *umod,
> >  	module_unload_free(mod);
> >  #if defined(CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD) && defined(CONFIG_SMP)
> >   free_init:
> > -	percpu_modfree(mod->refptr);
> > +	if (mod->refptr)
> > +		percpu_modfree(mod->refptr);
> >  #endif
> >  	module_free(mod, mod->module_init);
> >   free_core:
> 
> My reverse engineering of the secret, undocumented percpu_modfree()
> indicates that its mad inventor intended that percpu_modfree(NULL) be a
> valid thing to do.

Yes, percpu_modfree() should handle NULL.  If it doesn't, that's the bug.

Confused,
Rusty.
--
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/