linux-kernel - Re: [patch v8 3/7] nbd: check sock index in nbd_read

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, 22 Sep 2021 17:22:07 +0800
From:   Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>
To:     "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Cc:     josef@...icpanda.com, axboe@...nel.dk, hch@...radead.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, nbd@...er.debian.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [patch v8 3/7] nbd: check sock index in nbd_read_stat()

On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 06:34:28PM +0800, yukuai (C) wrote:
> On 2021/09/16 17:33, Yu Kuai wrote:
> > The sock that clent send request in nbd_send_cmd() and receive reply
> > in nbd_read_stat() should be the same.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/block/nbd.c | 4 ++++
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/block/nbd.c b/drivers/block/nbd.c
> > index 614c6ab2b8fe..c724a5bd7fa4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/block/nbd.c
> > +++ b/drivers/block/nbd.c
> > @@ -746,6 +746,10 @@ static struct nbd_cmd *nbd_read_stat(struct nbd_device *nbd, int index)
> >   		ret = -ENOENT;
> >   		goto out;
> >   	}
> > +	if (cmd->index != index) {
> > +		dev_err(disk_to_dev(nbd->disk), "Unexpected reply %d from different sock %d (expected %d)",
> > +			tag, index, cmd->index);
> > +	}
> >   	if (cmd->cmd_cookie != nbd_handle_to_cookie(handle)) {
> >   		dev_err(disk_to_dev(nbd->disk), "Double reply on req %p, cmd_cookie %u, handle cookie %u\n",
> >   			req, cmd->cmd_cookie, nbd_handle_to_cookie(handle));
> > 
> 
> Hi, Ming
> 
> Any suggestions about this patch?

I think this one relies on nbd protocol between server and client, and
does the protocol require both request and reply xmitted via same
socket?


Thanks,
Ming