netdev - Re: [PATCH] sunrpc: fix error path - actually return ERR

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: <20100312203546.GB13941@fieldses.org>
Date:	Fri, 12 Mar 2010 15:35:46 -0500
From:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>
To:	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
Cc:	Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
	ext-jani.1.nikula@...ia.com, neilb@...e.de, davem@...emloft.net,
	batsakis@...app.com, bhalevy@...asas.com,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sunrpc: fix error path - actually return ERR_PTR() on
	error

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 10:09:51AM -0500, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 23:14 +0900, Tetsuo Handa wrote: 
> > Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <ext-jani.1.nikula@...ia.com>
> > > 
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > NOTE: I'm afraid I'm unable to test this; please consider this more a
> > > bug report than a complete patch.
> > > ---
> > Indeed, it has to be "return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);".
> > Otherwise, it will trigger NULL pointer dereference some lines later.
> > 
> >     bc_sock = container_of(args->bc_xprt, struct svc_sock, sk_xprt);
> >     bc_sock->sk_bc_xprt = xprt;
> > 
> > This bug was introduced by f300baba5a1536070d6d77bf0c8c4ca999bb4f0f
> > "nfsd41: sunrpc: add new xprt class for nfsv4.1 backchannel" and
> > exists in 2.6.32 and later.
> 
> Or it should just be dropped. I don't see any reason why nfsd should be
> trying to set up a callback channel if it doesn't already know that it
> has a socket. Returning an error value in that case would just be
> papering over a design bug.

Yup.  At most it could be a BUG_ON, but it's probably better just to
delete the check.

--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html