linux-kernel - Re: [syzbot] WARNING in mntput_no

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: <YGxs5b0pY4esY7J7@zeniv-ca.linux.org.uk>
Date:   Tue, 6 Apr 2021 14:15:01 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Christian Brauner <christian.brauner@...ntu.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        syzbot <syzbot+c88a7030da47945a3cc3@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com, io-uring@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [syzbot] WARNING in mntput_no_expire (2)

On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 03:22:05PM +0200, Christian Brauner wrote:

> Why is a another function in charge of checking the return value of an
> initialization function. If something like path_init() fails why is the
> next caller responsible for rejecting it's return value and then we're
> passing that failure value through the whole function with if (!err)
> ladders but as I said it's mostly style preferences.

Because otherwise you either need *all* paths leading to link_path_walk()
duplicate the logics (and get hurt whenever you miss one) or have "well,
in some cases link_path_walk() handles ERR_PTR() given to it, in some
cases its caller do" mess.

> > >         s = path_init(nd, flags);
> > > -       if (IS_ERR(s))
> > > -               return PTR_ERR(s);
> > 
> > Where has that come from, BTW?  Currently path_lookupat() does no such thing.
> 
> Hm? Are you maybe overlooking path_init() which assigns straight into
> the variable declaration? Or are you referring to sm else?

I'm referring to the fact that your diff is with an already modified path_lookupat()
_and_ those modifications have managed to introduce a bug your patch reverts.
No terminate_walk() paired with that path_init() failure, i.e. path_init() is
responsible for cleanups on its (many) failure exits...