linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.9 048/101] libceph: drop len argument of *verify_authorizer

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: <20181206143014.329343547@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Thu,  6 Dec 2018 15:38:47 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>,
        Sage Weil <sage@...hat.com>,
        Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 048/101] libceph: drop len argument of *verify_authorizer_reply()

4.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>

commit 0dde584882ade13dc9708d611fbf69b0ae8a9e48 upstream.

The length of the reply is protocol-dependent - for cephx it's
ceph_x_authorize_reply.  Nothing sensible can be passed from the
messenger layer anyway.

Signed-off-by: Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>
Reviewed-by: Sage Weil <sage@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@...ethink.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 fs/ceph/mds_client.c           |    4 ++--
 include/linux/ceph/auth.h      |    5 ++---
 include/linux/ceph/messenger.h |    2 +-
 net/ceph/auth.c                |    4 ++--
 net/ceph/auth_x.c              |    2 +-
 net/ceph/messenger.c           |    2 +-
 net/ceph/osd_client.c          |    4 ++--
 7 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

--- a/fs/ceph/mds_client.c
+++ b/fs/ceph/mds_client.c
@@ -3984,13 +3984,13 @@ static struct ceph_auth_handshake *get_a
 }
 
 
-static int verify_authorizer_reply(struct ceph_connection *con, int len)
+static int verify_authorizer_reply(struct ceph_connection *con)
 {
 	struct ceph_mds_session *s = con->private;
 	struct ceph_mds_client *mdsc = s->s_mdsc;
 	struct ceph_auth_client *ac = mdsc->fsc->client->monc.auth;
 
-	return ceph_auth_verify_authorizer_reply(ac, s->s_auth.authorizer, len);
+	return ceph_auth_verify_authorizer_reply(ac, s->s_auth.authorizer);
 }
 
 static int invalidate_authorizer(struct ceph_connection *con)
--- a/include/linux/ceph/auth.h
+++ b/include/linux/ceph/auth.h
@@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ struct ceph_auth_client_ops {
 	int (*update_authorizer)(struct ceph_auth_client *ac, int peer_type,
 				 struct ceph_auth_handshake *auth);
 	int (*verify_authorizer_reply)(struct ceph_auth_client *ac,
-				       struct ceph_authorizer *a, size_t len);
+				       struct ceph_authorizer *a);
 	void (*invalidate_authorizer)(struct ceph_auth_client *ac,
 				      int peer_type);
 
@@ -118,8 +118,7 @@ extern int ceph_auth_update_authorizer(s
 				       int peer_type,
 				       struct ceph_auth_handshake *a);
 extern int ceph_auth_verify_authorizer_reply(struct ceph_auth_client *ac,
-					     struct ceph_authorizer *a,
-					     size_t len);
+					     struct ceph_authorizer *a);
 extern void ceph_auth_invalidate_authorizer(struct ceph_auth_client *ac,
 					    int peer_type);
 
--- a/include/linux/ceph/messenger.h
+++ b/include/linux/ceph/messenger.h
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ struct ceph_connection_operations {
 	struct ceph_auth_handshake *(*get_authorizer) (
 				struct ceph_connection *con,
 			       int *proto, int force_new);
-	int (*verify_authorizer_reply) (struct ceph_connection *con, int len);
+	int (*verify_authorizer_reply) (struct ceph_connection *con);
 	int (*invalidate_authorizer)(struct ceph_connection *con);
 
 	/* there was some error on the socket (disconnect, whatever) */
--- a/net/ceph/auth.c
+++ b/net/ceph/auth.c
@@ -315,13 +315,13 @@ int ceph_auth_update_authorizer(struct c
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(ceph_auth_update_authorizer);
 
 int ceph_auth_verify_authorizer_reply(struct ceph_auth_client *ac,
-				      struct ceph_authorizer *a, size_t len)
+				      struct ceph_authorizer *a)
 {
 	int ret = 0;
 
 	mutex_lock(&ac->mutex);
 	if (ac->ops && ac->ops->verify_authorizer_reply)
-		ret = ac->ops->verify_authorizer_reply(ac, a, len);
+		ret = ac->ops->verify_authorizer_reply(ac, a);
 	mutex_unlock(&ac->mutex);
 	return ret;
 }
--- a/net/ceph/auth_x.c
+++ b/net/ceph/auth_x.c
@@ -623,7 +623,7 @@ static int ceph_x_update_authorizer(
 }
 
 static int ceph_x_verify_authorizer_reply(struct ceph_auth_client *ac,
-					  struct ceph_authorizer *a, size_t len)
+					  struct ceph_authorizer *a)
 {
 	struct ceph_x_authorizer *au = (void *)a;
 	void *p = au->enc_buf;
--- a/net/ceph/messenger.c
+++ b/net/ceph/messenger.c
@@ -2045,7 +2045,7 @@ static int process_connect(struct ceph_c
 		 * should also define ->verify_authorizer_reply().
 		 * See get_connect_authorizer().
 		 */
-		ret = con->ops->verify_authorizer_reply(con, 0);
+		ret = con->ops->verify_authorizer_reply(con);
 		if (ret < 0) {
 			con->error_msg = "bad authorize reply";
 			return ret;
--- a/net/ceph/osd_client.c
+++ b/net/ceph/osd_client.c
@@ -4479,13 +4479,13 @@ static struct ceph_auth_handshake *get_a
 }
 
 
-static int verify_authorizer_reply(struct ceph_connection *con, int len)
+static int verify_authorizer_reply(struct ceph_connection *con)
 {
 	struct ceph_osd *o = con->private;
 	struct ceph_osd_client *osdc = o->o_osdc;
 	struct ceph_auth_client *ac = osdc->client->monc.auth;
 
-	return ceph_auth_verify_authorizer_reply(ac, o->o_auth.authorizer, len);
+	return ceph_auth_verify_authorizer_reply(ac, o->o_auth.authorizer);
 }
 
 static int invalidate_authorizer(struct ceph_connection *con)