linux-kernel - Re: [ide] ec7d9c9ce8: WARNING:at_fs/proc/generic.c:#remove_proc

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjvxCn2uYp7USY5bbVuffJcugusxHc-RU7u5H1=ubMyPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 20 Dec 2018 08:05:28 -0800
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, lkp@...org,
        linux-ide@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [ide] ec7d9c9ce8: WARNING:at_fs/proc/generic.c:#remove_proc_entry

On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 1:19 AM kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com> wrote:
>
> FYI, we noticed the following commit (built with gcc-7):
>
> commit: ec7d9c9ce897174243af4fcd201dbfc34df0f3a3 ("ide: replace ->proc_fops with ->proc_show")
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git master

Funky.  How did the kernel test robot suddenly figure out an 8-month
old problem?

> [   44.180514] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 165 at fs/proc/generic.c:662 remove_proc_entry+0xb9/0x155

This is a warning for somebody doing "remove_proc_entry() on a name
that doesn't actually exist in that /proc directory.

In this case, it does seem to be due to the named commit adding a

+               remove_proc_entry("settings", drive->proc);

to ide_proc_unregister_device(), and looking at the patch I get the
feeling that it's due to a typo: the code *creates* the file called
"setting", but removes the file "settings". Note the missing "s" at
creation time.

And yes, the name of the /proc file _should_be "settings", judging by
the rest of the patch.

So it does seem to be a real bug. Nobody noticed until now? Why did
the test robot suddenly react to it?

              Linus