linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers/firmware: psci_checker: Add missing destroy_timer_on

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: <CAK8P3a1A_Nf=xzPwnW7SCaOumr7Mv5Y7kXCd=b=+-nNdAdG6GA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 30 Oct 2017 10:17:54 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
Cc:     arm-soc <arm@...nel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/firmware: psci_checker: Add missing destroy_timer_on_stack()

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Lorenzo Pieralisi
<lorenzo.pieralisi@....com> wrote:
> The PSCI checker suspend_test_thread() function (ie executed for the
> suspend test) requires an on-stack timer to carry out the test it
> executes; it sets it up through the setup_timer_on_stack() API.
>
> setup_timer_on_stack() requires its counterpart destroy_timer_on_stack()
> to be called when the timer is disposed of but the PSCI checker code is
> currently missing that call, leaving the timer object in an incosistent
> state when the PSCI checker stops the thread executing the suspend
> test.
>
> Add the missing destroy_timer_on_stack() call to fix the omission.
>
> Fixes: ea8b1c4a6019 ("drivers: psci: PSCI checker module")
> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>
> Reported-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>

Hi Lorenzo,

You addressed the patch 'To: arm@...nel.org', but I'm not entirely
sure what to do with it, it would be nice to be a little more explicit whether
you want us to apply the patch directly or just review it, and which trees
you want it to get merged into.

As you are fixing a regression against v4.10, I would assume you want
it merged into v4.14 with a 'cc: stable' tag to have it backported into v4.13,
correct?

      Arnd