linux-kernel - Re: [RFC v1 4/4] nvmet-discovery: do not use invalid port

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: <vml2mmhjurjaalzcmugnu2c4cm4okfkl43swbmudmaotew4gsy@o4q44el473to>
Date:   Tue, 5 Sep 2023 12:40:24 +0200
From:   Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
        Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        James Smart <james.smart@...adcom.com>,
        Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 4/4] nvmet-discovery: do not use invalid port

On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 08:50:32AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > +	/* No port assigned, portentrybinding is missing */
> 
> Double new line above, and I think a missing white space before
> binding.

Yep, sorry.

> But I'm still confused how we can get here without req->port
> set.  Can you try to do a little more analysis as I suspect we have
> a deeper problem somewhere.

I am only able to reproduce this if there are two connect/discovery
attempts happening at the same time. I'll collect some logs and attempt
to make some sense out of it.