linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] nfp: flower: Fix a potential leak in nfp_tunnel_add_shared

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: <01035905-61f5-da02-36d5-92831e1da184@wanadoo.fr>
Date:   Thu, 17 Feb 2022 19:20:30 +0100
From:   Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        John Hurley <john.hurley@...ronome.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        oss-drivers@...igine.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] nfp: flower: Fix a potential leak in
 nfp_tunnel_add_shared_mac()

Le 17/02/2022 à 08:59, Simon Horman a écrit :
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 04:53:56PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 23:34:52 +0100 Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>>> ida_simple_get() returns an id between min (0) and max (NFP_MAX_MAC_INDEX)
>>> inclusive.
>>> So NFP_MAX_MAC_INDEX (0xff) is a valid id.
>>>
>>> In order for the error handling path to work correctly, the 'invalid'
>>> value for 'ida_idx' should not be in the 0..NFP_MAX_MAC_INDEX range,
>>> inclusive.
>>>
>>> So set it to -1.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 20cce8865098 ("nfp: flower: enable MAC address sharing for offloadable devs")
>>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
>>
>> This patch is a fix and the other one is refactoring. They can't be
>> in the same series because they need to go to different trees. Please
>> repost the former with [PATCH net] and ~one week later the latter with
>> [PATCH net-next].
> 
> Thanks Jakub.
> 
> Christophe, please let me know if you'd like me to handle reposting
> the patches as described by Jakub.
> 
Hi,

If you can, it's fine for me.

I must admit that what I consider, as an hobbyist, too much bureaucracy 
is sometimes discouraging.

I do understand the need for maintainers to have things the way they 
need, but, well, maybe sometimes it is too much.

In this particular case, maybe patch 1/2 could be applied to net as-is, 
and 2/2 just dropped because not really useful.


(Just the thoughts of a tired man after a long day at work, don't worry, 
tomorrow, I'll be in a better mood)

CJ