[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20210108175008.da3c60a6e402f5f1ddab2a65@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2021 17:50:08 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Xiaoming Ni <nixiaoming@...wei.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mcgrof@...nel.org,
yzaikin@...gle.com, adobriyan@...il.com,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, vbabka@...e.cz, wangle6@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] proc_sysctl: fix oops caused by incorrect command
parameters.
On Fri, 8 Jan 2021 21:10:25 +0100 Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com> wrote:
> > > Why would that matter? A missing value is clearly a error path and it
> > > should be reported.
> >
> > This test is in the correct place. I think it's just a question of the
> > return values.
>
> I was probably not clear. The test for val is at the right place. I
> would just expect -EINVAL and have the generic code to report.
It does seem a bit screwy that process_sysctl_arg() returns zero in all
situations (parse_args() is set up to handle an error return from it).
But this patch is consistent with all the other error handling in
process_sysctl_arg().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists