linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: Fix incorrect parameters in NULL pointer checking

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <fd2acc68-ca3f-4d83-554b-a2aa89ad7b5c@linux.dev>
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 15:12:06 +0800
From: Hao Ge <hao.ge@...ux.dev>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>,
 Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
 Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
 Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau
 <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eddy Z <eddyz87@...il.com>,
 Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
 KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
 Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
 Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@...com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
 bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
 "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Hao Ge <gehao@...inos.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: Fix incorrect parameters in NULL pointer
 checking

Hi Dan and Alexei


I apologize for any inconvenience my mistake may have caused to both of you.


On 8/22/24 06:31, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 03:07:27PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 2:50 PM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 02:03:17PM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>>> On 8/19/24 7:34 PM, Hao Ge wrote:
>>>>> From: Hao Ge <gehao@...inos.cn>
>>>>>
>>>>> Smatch reported the following warning:
>>>>>       ./tools/testing/selftests/bpf/testing_helpers.c:455 get_xlated_program()
>>>>>       warn: variable dereferenced before check 'buf' (see line 454)
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems correct,so let's modify it based on it's suggestion.
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually,commit b23ed4d74c4d ("selftests/bpf: Fix invalid pointer
>>>>> check in get_xlated_program()") fixed an issue in the test_verifier.c
>>>>> once,but it was reverted this time.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's solve this issue with the minimal changes possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
>>>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/1eb3732f-605a-479d-ba64-cd14250cbf91@stanley.mountain/
>>>>> Fixes: b4b7a4099b8c ("selftests/bpf: Factor out get_xlated_program() helper")
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hao Ge <gehao@...inos.cn>
>>>> In the future, please change subject '[PATCH] ...' to '[PATCH bpf-next] ...'
>>>> so CI can properly test it.
>>> It feels like there should be a technical solution to this.  The CI system is
>>> something on AWS and it's too expensive to just check every patch that's sent to
>>> the bpf list?  My understanding is that there are only two bpf trees.
>>>
>>>          if [ "$FIXES_HASH" == "" ] ; then
>>>                  TREE=next
>>>          elif git merge-base --is-ancestor $FIXES_HASH origin/master ; then
>>>                  TREE=linus
>>>          else
>>>                  TREE=next
>>>          fi
>>>
>>> These days the zero day bot people are checking around a thousand git trees.
>>> They pull emails off the various lists and apply them to the right places.  It's
>>> a doable thing.
>> Dan,
>>
>> Various people pointed out that you need to use the proper subject in
>> the patches.
>> You clearly knew that rule and yet you ignored it,
>> and worse still you keep coming up with these excuses.
>> Don't be surprised that people who are supposed to review your patches
>> will take a long time to reply or "forget" about them as you "forget"
>> about patch submission rules.


Perhaps it was referring to me? Regardless, I will reflect on myself and 
make improvements.


> You're emailing the wrong person.  This isn't my patch.  I don't send BPF
> patches.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter