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:   Thu, 6 Apr 2023 14:53:45 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-next@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/mprotect: Fix do_mprotect_pkey() return on error

On Thu,  6 Apr 2023 15:30:50 -0400 "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com> wrote:

> When the loop over the VMA is terminated early due to an error, the
> return code could be overwritten with ENOMEM.  Fix the return code by
> only setting the error on early loop termination when the error is not
> set.
> 
> Fixes: 2286a6914c77 ("mm: change mprotect_fixup to vma iterator")
> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org>

I do think we should always describe the user-visible effects when
proposing a backport.

a) so the -stable maintainers understand why we're recommending the
   backport and

b) to help some poor soul who is looking at the patch wondering if
   it will fix his customer's bug report.

How's this?

: User-visible effects include: attempts to run mprotect() against a special
: mapping or with a poorly-aligned hugetlb address should return -EINVAL,
: but they presently return -ENOMEM.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ