linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: Let scsi_execute_cmd() mark args->sshdr as invalid

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: <yq1pm6sm34j.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 May 2023 18:26:06 -0400
From:   "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
To:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
Cc:     "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        "James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: Let scsi_execute_cmd() mark args->sshdr as invalid

Juergen,

> sshdr is output only data, so setting it before returning seems to be a
> sensible thing to do.

I would love to rototill all this and make sense make sense (!) but
that's a major undertaking. Until then we need to validate that callers
check the return value before they start poking at the sense data. Even
if things were zeroed ahead of time, other things could have gone wrong
that would affect how an error condition should be handled.

> Letting the callers do that is kind of a layering violation IMHO,

scsi_execute_cmd() is one big layering violation, I'm afraid.

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering