[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <554BF418.5080200@hurleysoftware.com>
Date: Thu, 07 May 2015 19:24:08 -0400
From: Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Iulia Manda <iulia.manda21@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>,
Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] devpts: If initialization failed, don't crash when opening
/dev/ptmx
On 05/07/2015 06:59 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 6 May 2015 17:35:47 -0700 Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org> wrote:
>
>> If devpts failed to initialize, it would store an ERR_PTR in the global
>> devpts_mnt. A subsequent open of /dev/ptmx would call devpts_new_index,
>> which would dereference devpts_mnt and crash.
>>
>> Avoid storing invalid values in devpts_mnt; leave it NULL instead.
>> Make both devpts_new_index and devpts_pty_new fail gracefully with
>> ENODEV in that case, which then becomes the return value to the
>> userspace open call on /dev/ptmx.
>
> It looks like the system is pretty crippled if init_devptr_fs() fails.
> Can the user actually get access to consoles and do useful things in
> this situation? Maybe it would be better to just give up and panic?
A single-user console is definitely reachable without devpts.
>From there, one could fixup to a not-broken kernel.
Regards,
Peter Hurley
PS - But I saw you already added these to -mm
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists