netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/9] ipv6: sr: add code base for control plane support of SR-IPv6

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: <5804E8DE.20200@uclouvain.be>
Date:   Mon, 17 Oct 2016 17:06:06 +0200
From:   David Lebrun <david.lebrun@...ouvain.be>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] ipv6: sr: add code base for control plane support
 of SR-IPv6

On 10/17/2016 05:00 PM, David Miller wrote:
> Please ordre local variables from longest to shortest line (AKA reverse
> christmas tree layout).
> 
> Please audit your entire submission for this problem.
> 
>> +	val = (struct in6_addr *)nla_data(info->attrs[SEG6_ATTR_DST]);
> 
> Please remove all casts from void pointers, they are completely unecessary.
> Since nla_data() returns "(void *)", this applies here.
> 
> Please audit your entire submission for this problem.
> 

Will do

>> +	mutex_init(&sdata->lock);
>> +
>> +	sdata->tun_src = kzalloc(sizeof(*sdata->tun_src), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!sdata->tun_src) {
>> +		kfree(sdata);
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
> 
> Best not to free an object while you still hold a mutex inside of it.
> 
> Also taking the mutex makes no sense at all, this object has no global
> visibility, therefore no other thread of control can operate upon it.
> 

The mutex is not taken, just initialized. Unless mutex_init takes the
lock, which would be quite strange ?


Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)