linux-kernel - Re: [v1] mm: access to uninitialized struct page

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]

Date:   Tue, 24 Apr 2018 16:00:11 -0400
From:   Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:     Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, tglx@...utronix.de,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        mgorman@...hsingularity.net, mingo@...nel.org,
        peterz@...radead.org, Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
        Dennis Zhou <dennisszhou@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [v1] mm: access to uninitialized struct page

Hi Steven,

Thank you for your review:

>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/4/18/797
>
> #2, Do not use "lkml.org" it is a very unreliable source.
>

OK

> I'm fine with this change, but what happens if mm_init() traps?
>
> But that is probably not a case we really care about, as it is in the
> very early boot stage.


Yes, the assumption is that we do not trap in mm_init(), which I think
is the case because of early boot, and also I did not see this happen
during testing.

>
>>
>>       ftrace_init();
>>
>
> One thing I could add is to move ftrace_init() before trap_init(). But
> that may require some work, because it may still depend on trap_init()
> as well. But making ftrace_init() not depend on trap_init() is easier
> than making it not depend on ftrace_init(). Although it may require
> more arch updates.
>
> I'm not saying that you should move it, it's something that can be
> added later after this change is implemented.

This makes, sense, but should be done outside of this bug fix.

>
> Reviewed-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@...dmis.org>
>

Thank you. I will send out an updated patch.

Pavel