linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v2 1/5] docs: notifier-error-inject: fix non-working usage of negative values

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <93339a97-ea08-0880-b0cf-e5270179079a@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2022 13:05:25 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     zhaogongyi <zhaogongyi@...wei.com>,
        Akinobu Mita <akinobu.mita@...il.com>
Cc:     "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        "osalvador@...e.de" <osalvador@...e.de>,
        "shuah@...nel.org" <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v2 1/5] docs: notifier-error-inject: fix non-working
 usage of negative values

On 19.09.22 11:01, zhaogongyi wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>>
>> On 17.09.22 07:39, Akinobu Mita wrote:
>>> 2022年9月15日(木) 18:01 Zhao Gongyi <zhaogongyi@...wei.com>:
>>>>
>>>> Fault injection uses debugfs in a way that the provided values via
>>>> sysfs are interpreted as u64. Providing negative numbers results in
>>>> an error:
>>>>
>>>>     # cd sys/kernel/debug/notifier-error-inject/memory
>>>>     #  echo -12 > actions/MEM_GOING_ONLINE/error
>>>>     -bash: echo: write error: Invalid argument
>>>>
>>>> Update the docs and examples to use "printf %#x <val>" in these cases.
>>>
>>> I'd rather fix the notifier-error-inject module than change the user
>> interface.
>>> I'll send a patch, so could you check if that solves the problem.
>>>
>>
>> That will also make patch #2 unnecessary, correct?
> 
> Yes. But there is another commit 005747526d4f3c2ec995891e95cb7625161022f9 that has the same problem.
> 
> Thanks!

Right. See my reply to the other patch:

https://lkml.kernel.org/r/93c044ca-7d2f-e23f-8eb4-72c133737a15@redhat.com

simple_attr_read()/simple_attr_write() fmt behavior is odd.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb