linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] quota: check for register

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: <20230320171146.ecqophvlz5hspmkb@quack3>
Date:   Mon, 20 Mar 2023 18:11:46 +0100
From:   Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:     Yangtao Li <frank.li@...o.com>
Cc:     jack@...e.cz, jack@...e.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] quota: check for register_sysctl() failure

On Mon 20-03-23 19:40:28, Yangtao Li wrote:
> > Well, but this is going to make system unbootable with
> > CONFIG_QUOTA && !CONFIG_SYSCTL.
> > Quota functionality actually does not depend on sysctl being
> > available so just continuing without sysctl is perfectly fine.
> 
> To be honest, I'm a little confused. Should we panic if quota
> registration fails, or should it depend on the user's cmdline
> parameters? Just like in the filesystem where we can choose
> whether to panic in case of exceptions.
> 
> Or, should we panic if registration fails when
> CONFIG_QUOTA && CONFIG_SYSCTL are enabled?

So I think that just ignoring the failure to register sysctl (as is
currently happening) is fine. Honestly, in practice this is not a likely
scenario so I don't think it matters much but if we wanted, we could print
a message that sysctl registration failed if CONFIG_SYSCTL is enabled.
 
> BTW, kindly ping for:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230228103515.sb6qpvnmbvenvq73@quack3/
> 
> Not sure if you have forgotten to pick these two commits.

Yeah, sorry. Now picked up and pushed.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>
SUSE Labs, CR