linux-kernel - Re: [V9fs-developer] [PATCH 2/2] fs/9p: detecting invalid options as much as possible

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: <20180416075641.GA16402@nautica>
Date:   Mon, 16 Apr 2018 16:56:41 +0900
From:   Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>
To:     Chengguang Xu <cgxu519@....com>
Cc:     ericvh@...il.com, rminnich@...dia.gov, lucho@...kov.net,
        v9fs-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [V9fs-developer] [PATCH 2/2] fs/9p: detecting invalid options as
 much as possible

Chengguang Xu wrote on Mon, Apr 16, 2018:
>  		default:
> +			p9_debug(P9_DEBUG_ERROR,
> +				"unrecognized mount option \"%s\" or missing value\n",
> +					p);
>  			continue;

The problem with that is that the same options are passed to the vfs,
net and transport init later on - none of which know the full subset of
valid options to tell what option has been recognized or not.

Unless we do some backward-incompatible breakage of passing all the
net/transport options in its own option (e.g. net=foo:bar:moo) there
unfortunately is no nice way of fixing this now.

(I don't mind the rest of the patches, although I'd say if we hit ENOMEM
there is likely trouble going on so I'm not so sure about hiding it if
there also is an EINVAL, but I don't really care)
-- 
Dominique Martinet | Asmadeus