linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rxrpc: recvmsg: use BUG_ON instead of if condition followed by BUG

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: <20171024210226.Horde.iXXgNYpvrqrFJuHbzaj6dG0@gator4166.hostgator.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 Oct 2017 21:02:26 -0500
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
To:     Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rxrpc: recvmsg: use BUG_ON instead of if condition
 followed by BUG

Hi Tom,

Quoting Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>:

> Please combine these related patches fixing BUG in rxrpc into a patch
> set with proper annotation,
>

I can do that.

> Also, can any of these BUG_ONs be replaced by WARN_ONs? Warnings are
> generally preferable to crashing the system.
>

What about WARN_ON_ONCE instead?

Thanks
--
Gustavo A. R. Silva

> Tom
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva
> <garsilva@...eddedor.com> wrote:
>> Use BUG_ON instead of if condition followed by BUG.
>>
>> This issue was detected with the help of Coccinelle.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
>> ---
>>  net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c | 6 ++----
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c b/net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c
>> index bdece21..9598b92 100644
>> --- a/net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c
>> +++ b/net/rxrpc/recvmsg.c
>> @@ -243,8 +243,7 @@ static int rxrpc_verify_packet(struct  
>> rxrpc_call *call, struct sk_buff *skb,
>>          */
>>         if ((annotation & RXRPC_RX_ANNO_JUMBO) > 1) {
>>                 __be16 tmp;
>> -               if (skb_copy_bits(skb, offset - 2, &tmp, 2) < 0)
>> -                       BUG();
>> +               BUG_ON(skb_copy_bits(skb, offset - 2, &tmp, 2) < 0);
>>                 cksum = ntohs(tmp);
>>                 seq += (annotation & RXRPC_RX_ANNO_JUMBO) - 1;
>>         }
>> @@ -503,8 +502,7 @@ int rxrpc_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct  
>> msghdr *msg, size_t len,
>>
>>         release_sock(&rx->sk);
>>
>> -       if (test_bit(RXRPC_CALL_RELEASED, &call->flags))
>> -               BUG();
>> +       BUG_ON(test_bit(RXRPC_CALL_RELEASED, &call->flags));
>>
>>         if (test_bit(RXRPC_CALL_HAS_USERID, &call->flags)) {
>>                 if (flags & MSG_CMSG_COMPAT) {
>> --
>> 2.7.4
>>