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: <20230905065032.GC19701@lst.de>
Date:   Tue, 5 Sep 2023 08:50:32 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.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>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 4/4] nvmet-discovery: do not use invalid port

On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 11:13:49AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> The port entry binding might not be existing and thus the req->port
> pointer is not valid.
> 
> Reproducer: nvme/005 with active system nvmf-autoconnect systemd service.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>
> ---
>  drivers/nvme/target/discovery.c | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/target/discovery.c b/drivers/nvme/target/discovery.c
> index 668d257fa986..fc113057cb95 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/target/discovery.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/target/discovery.c
> @@ -191,6 +191,15 @@ static void nvmet_execute_disc_get_log_page(struct nvmet_req *req)
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> +
> +	/* No port assigned, portentrybinding is missing */

Double new line above, and I think a missing white space before
binding.  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.