linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] bcache: safeguard a dangerous addressing in closure

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: <95ddfc9f-b01e-3346-4ebf-d15d73644d35@lyle.org>
Date:   Thu, 12 Oct 2017 22:48:51 -0700
From:   Michael Lyle <mlyle@...e.org>
To:     Liang Chen <liangchen.linux@...il.com>,
        linux-bcache@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     i@...y.li, kent.overstreet@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bcache: safeguard a dangerous addressing in
 closure_queue

Hi Liang--

Thanks for the quick turnaround.  I've added this to bcache-for-next.

On 10/12/2017 10:30 PM, Liang Chen wrote:
> The use of the union reduces the size of closure struct by taking advantage
> of the current size of its members. The offset of func in work_struct equals
> the size of the first three members, so that work.work_func will just
> reference the forth member - fn.
> 
> This is smart but dangerous. It can be broken if work_struct or the other
> structs get changed, and can be a bit difficult to debug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Liang Chen <liangchen.linux@...il.com>

Reviewed-by: Michael Lyle <mlyle@...e.org>

-Mike