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: <ba517afc-c99c-4712-9166-bed9958e6124@suse.de>
Date:   Wed, 6 Sep 2023 13:23:14 +0200
From:   Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To:     Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 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 8/29/23 11:13, 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 */

Missing space.

> +	if (!req->port) {
> +		req->error_loc =
> +			offsetof(struct nvme_get_log_page_command, lpo);
> +		status = NVME_SC_INVALID_FIELD | NVME_SC_DNR;
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
>   	/*
>   	 * Make sure we're passing at least a buffer of response header size.
>   	 * If host provided data len is less than the header size, only the
Otherwise looks good.

Cheers,

Hannes