linux-kernel - Re: [patch] nvme-fabrics: correct some printk information

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: <20161210184029.GY8176@mwanda>
Date:   Sat, 10 Dec 2016 21:55:29 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:     James Smart <james.smart@...adcom.com>,
        Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...com>,
        linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] nvme-fabrics: correct some printk information

On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 03:27:50AM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-12-10 at 12:06 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > We really don't care where "ctrl" is on the stack since we're just
> > returning soon what we want is the actual ctrl pointer itself.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/nvme/host/fc.c b/drivers/nvme/host/fc.c
> []
> > @@ -2402,7 +2402,7 @@ enum blk_eh_timer_return
> >  
> >  	dev_info(ctrl->ctrl.device,
> >  		"NVME-FC{%d}: new ctrl: NQN \"%s\" (%p)\n",
> > -		ctrl->cnum, ctrl->ctrl.opts->subsysnqn, &ctrl);
> > +		ctrl->cnum, ctrl->ctrl.opts->subsysnqn, ctrl);
> 
> Found by script or inspection?
> 
> If by script, it seems unlikely there's only 1 instance
> where an address of an automatic pointer type is used
> incorrectly.

Script.  But it's using a pretty specific heuristic where we kmalloc a
pointer and then pass the address.  It prints few warnings.  Probably
40% false positives, but the remaining examples of course are 100% false
positives.

regards,
dan carpenter