linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 14/16] modules: Support extended MODVERSIONS info

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: <CABCJKufJK0WO92wnW09VTLqZk0ODxhuKQG=HbKE-va0urJU1Vg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 20:33:15 +0000
From: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@...gle.com>
To: Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com>
Cc: masahiroy@...nel.org, ndesaulniers@...gle.com, ojeda@...nel.org, 
	gary@...yguo.net, mcgrof@...nel.org, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, 
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>, Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>, 
	Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>, Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>, 
	rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, neal@...pa.dev, marcan@...can.st, j@...nau.net, 
	asahi@...ts.linux.dev, Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, 
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>, 
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>, Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>, 
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, 
	linux-modules@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 14/16] modules: Support extended MODVERSIONS info

Hi Matt,

On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 9:25 PM Matthew Maurer <mmaurer@...gle.com> wrote:
>
[...]
> +void modversion_ext_start(const struct load_info *info,
> +                         struct modversion_info_ext *start)
> +{
> +       unsigned int crc_idx = info->index.vers_ext_crc;
> +       unsigned int name_idx = info->index.vers_ext_name;
> +       Elf_Shdr *sechdrs = info->sechdrs;
> +
> +       /*
> +        * Both of these fields are needed for this to be useful
> +        * Any future fields should be initialized to NULL if absent.
> +        */
> +       if ((crc_idx == 0) || (name_idx == 0))

nit: The extra parentheses are not necessary.

> +               start->remaining = 0;
> +
> +       start->crc = (const s32 *)sechdrs[crc_idx].sh_addr;
> +       start->name = (const char *)sechdrs[name_idx].sh_addr;
> +       start->remaining = sechdrs[crc_idx].sh_size / sizeof(*start->crc);
> +}

Is this missing an else condition or a return? Why set
start->remaining to zero and then proceed to assign a possibly invalid
value to it anyway?

Sami