linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected)

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: <20200701135324.GS4332@42.do-not-panic.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Jul 2020 13:53:24 +0000
From:   Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc:     Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, ast@...nel.org,
        axboe@...nel.dk, bfields@...ldses.org,
        bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org, chainsaw@...too.org,
        christian.brauner@...ntu.com, chuck.lever@...cle.com,
        davem@...emloft.net, dhowells@...hat.com,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com,
        jmorris@...ei.org, josh@...htriplett.org, keescook@...omium.org,
        keyrings@...r.kernel.org, kuba@...nel.org,
        lars.ellenberg@...bit.com, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com,
        philipp.reisner@...bit.com, ravenexp@...il.com,
        roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, serge@...lyn.com, slyfox@...too.org,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, markward@...ux.ibm.com,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used
 seems to break linux bridge on s390x (bisected)

On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 10:24:29PM +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2020/07/01 19:08, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 30.06.20 19:57, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:54:10AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 08:37:55PM +0200, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 24.06.20 20:32, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> >>>> [...]> 
> >>>>> So the translations look correct. But your change is actually a sematic change
> >>>>> if(ret) will only trigger if there is an error
> >>>>> if (KWIFEXITED(ret)) will always trigger when the process ends. So we will always overwrite -ECHILD
> >>>>> and we did not do it before. 
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> So the right fix is
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/kernel/umh.c b/kernel/umh.c
> >>>> index f81e8698e36e..a3a3196e84d1 100644
> >>>> --- a/kernel/umh.c
> >>>> +++ b/kernel/umh.c
> >>>> @@ -154,7 +154,7 @@ static void call_usermodehelper_exec_sync(struct subprocess_info *sub_info)
> >>>>                  * the real error code is already in sub_info->retval or
> >>>>                  * sub_info->retval is 0 anyway, so don't mess with it then.
> >>>>                  */
> >>>> -               if (KWIFEXITED(ret))
> >>>> +               if (KWEXITSTATUS(ret))
> >>>>                         sub_info->retval = KWEXITSTATUS(ret);
> 
> Well, it is not br_stp_call_user() but br_stp_start() which is expecting
> to set sub_info->retval for both KWIFEXITED() case and KWIFSIGNALED() case.
> That is, sub_info->retval needs to carry raw value (i.e. without "umh: fix
> processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is used" will be the correct behavior).

br_stp_start() doesn't check for the raw value, it just checks for err
or !err. So the patch, "umh: fix processed error when UMH_WAIT_PROC is
used" propagates the correct error now.

Christian, can you try removing the binary temporarily and seeing if
you get your bridge working?

  Luis