linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 059/190] Revert "RDMA/srpt: Remove unnecessary assertion in srpt_queue

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: <YIgege5WK+jwOXXA@kroah.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Apr 2021 16:24:01 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
Cc:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 059/190] Revert "RDMA/srpt: Remove unnecessary assertion
 in srpt_queue_response"

On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 09:05:44AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 4/21/21 7:05 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 11:02:47AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:58:54PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > This reverts commit 9f48db0d4a08624bb9ba847ea40c8abad753b396.
> > > > 
> > > > Commits from @umn.edu addresses have been found to be submitted in "bad
> > > > faith" to try to test the kernel community's ability to review "known
> > > > malicious" changes.  The result of these submissions can be found in a
> > > > paper published at the 42nd IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
> > > > entitled, "Open Source Insecurity: Stealthily Introducing
> > > > Vulnerabilities via Hypocrite Commits" written by Qiushi Wu (University
> > > > of Minnesota) and Kangjie Lu (University of Minnesota).
> > > > 
> > > > Because of this, all submissions from this group must be reverted from
> > > > the kernel tree and will need to be re-reviewed again to determine if
> > > > they actually are a valid fix.  Until that work is complete, remove this
> > > > change to ensure that no problems are being introduced into the
> > > > codebase.
> > > > 
> > > > Cc: https
> > > > Cc: Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>
> > > > Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
> > > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
> > > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...lanox.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > > >   drivers/infiniband/ulp/srpt/ib_srpt.c | 2 ++
> > > >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > > 
> > > I think this one is fine
> > 
> > Sorry, I realize that is unclear. I mean I don't see a reason to
> > revert this patch.
> 
> Greg, I share Jason's opinion and would like to see this revert dropped. The
> function srpt_queue_response() dereferences the 'ch' pointer before the
> BUG_ON(ch) statement is reached. I think this makes the BUG_ON() statement
> that would be reintroduced by this revert superfluous.

Thanks for the review, I will go drop this commit from my tree.

greg k-h