linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] genirq: proc: fix a procfs entry leak

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: <87v8d3b23x.ffs@tglx>
Date:   Fri, 25 Aug 2023 16:58:26 +0200
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] genirq: proc: fix a procfs entry leak

On Fri, Aug 25 2023 at 13:01, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 10:11 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> I was under the impression that the whole irqnum-to-irq_desc mapping
> was designed to handle this situation on purpose, hence a check for
> !desc and a silent return in free_irq(). If a missing mapping was a
> bug, then it would warrant at least a warning, right?

The check for !desc has nothing to do with the problem you are trying to
solve. There is obviously a valid interrupt descriptor so desc != NULL,
otherwise there would be no procfs entries and no actions, no?

Thanks,

        tglx