linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: Fix avoid intensive reconnecting for ko2iblnd patch

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]

Date:   Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:56:28 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     "Eremin, Dmitry" <dmitry.eremin@...el.com>
Cc:     "devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        "Drokin, Oleg" <oleg.drokin@...el.com>,
        "Dilger, Andreas" <andreas.dilger@...el.com>,
        James Simmons <jsimmons@...radead.org>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lustre Development List <lustre-devel@...ts.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: Fix avoid intensive reconnecting for
 ko2iblnd patch

On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 03:01:49PM +0000, Eremin, Dmitry wrote:
> In the original commit 4d99b2581effe115376402e710fbcb1c3c073769

Please use the documented way to write this:
	4d99b2581eff ("staging: lustre: avoid intensive reconnecting for ko2iblnd")

> was missed one hunk. Added it now to avoid issue with use after free.

And I do not understand this commit message at all.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin <Dmitry.Eremin@...el.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c
> index 2ebc484..a15a625 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c
> @@ -890,7 +890,8 @@ void kiblnd_destroy_conn(struct kib_conn *conn, bool free_conn)
>  		atomic_dec(&net->ibn_nconns);
>  	}
>  
> -	kfree(conn);
> +	if (free_conn)
> +		kfree(conn);

This looks really odd, don't you think?

thanks,

greg k-h