linux-kernel - Re: [sgi-xp] Missing break or false positive?

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:   Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:23:09 -0500
From:   Robin Holt <robinmholt@...il.com>
To:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@...eddedor.com>
Cc:     Cliff Whickman <cpw@....com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [sgi-xp] Missing break or false positive?

I am sorry for my delayed response.  I missed the earlier email.

On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:37 AM Gustavo A. R. Silva
<gustavo@...eddedor.com> wrote:
>
...
> > I'm taking a look into the following piece of code in drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c:
...
> > and I'm trying to figure out if the following warning is due to a missing break
> > at the end of the case, or if this is just a false positive and a /* fall through */
> > annotation should be added:

The fall-through is by design.  The protocol previously had a windows
of failure where a connection
could be in the process of being established and a failure could be
detected prior to the
handling of the establishment message.  I added the new open complete
message and leveraged
the fall-through to mark the connection established.

Please let me know if you do not intend to submit a patch for this.

Thank you,
Robin Holt