linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] b43legacy: Fix a sleep-in-atomic bug in b43legacy_attr_interfmode

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170730122404.63efba2c@wiggum>
Date:   Sun, 30 Jul 2017 12:24:04 +0200
From:   Michael Büsch <m@...s.ch>
To:     Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@....com>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org, kvalo@...eaurora.org,
        Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] b43legacy: Fix a sleep-in-atomic bug in
 b43legacy_attr_interfmode_store

On Fri, 02 Jun 2017 09:18:14 +0800
Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@....com> wrote:

> On 06/02/2017 12:11 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > On Thu, 01 Jun 2017 09:05:07 +0800
> > Jia-Ju Bai<baijiaju1990@....com>  wrote:
> >  
> >> I admit my patches are not well tested, and they may not well fix the bugs.
> >> I am looking forward to opinions and suggestions :)  
> > May I politely suggest that sending out untested locking changes is a
> > dangerous thing to do?  You really should not be changing the locking in a
> > piece of kernel code without understanding very well what the lock is
> > protecting and being able to say why your changes are safe.  Without that,
> > the risk of introducing subtle bugs is very high.
> >
> > It looks like you have written a useful tool that could help us to make
> > the kernel more robust.  If you are interested in my suggestion, I would
> > recommend that you post the sleep-in-atomic scenarios that you are
> > finding, but refrain from "fixing" them in any case where you cannot offer
> > a strong explanation of why your fix is correct.
> >
> > Thanks for working to find bugs in the kernel!
> >
> > jon  
> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for your good and helpful advice. I am sorry for my improper patches.
> I will only report bugs instead of sending improper patches when I have 
> no good solution of fixing the bugs.


Is somebody still working on these fixes?
I think I found my old b43-legacy based 4306, so that I will
be able to get these patches into properly tested shape.

-- 
Michael

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped