netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net/smc: cast sizeof to int for comparison

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: <a11a5898-b422-4344-c043-de2b19d24023@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 17 Sep 2018 13:49:10 +0200
From:   Ursula Braun <ubraun@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/smc: cast sizeof to int for comparison



On 09/17/2018 11:38 AM, YueHaibing wrote:
> 
> On 2018/9/17 16:49, Ursula Braun wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 09/15/2018 12:00 PM, YueHaibing wrote:
>>> Comparing an int to a size, which is unsigned, causes the int to become
>>> unsigned, giving the wrong result. kernel_sendmsg can return a negative
>>> error code.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for reporting this issue!
>>
>>> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
>>> ---
>>>  net/smc/smc_clc.c | 2 +-
>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_clc.c b/net/smc/smc_clc.c
>>> index 83aba9a..fd0f5ce 100644
>>> --- a/net/smc/smc_clc.c
>>> +++ b/net/smc/smc_clc.c
>>> @@ -446,7 +446,7 @@ int smc_clc_send_proposal(struct smc_sock *smc, int smc_type,
>>>  	vec[i++].iov_len = sizeof(trl);
>>>  	/* due to the few bytes needed for clc-handshake this cannot block */
>>>  	len = kernel_sendmsg(smc->clcsock, &msg, vec, i, plen);
>>> -	if (len < sizeof(pclc)) {
>>> +	if (len < (int)sizeof(pclc)) {
>>>  		if (len >= 0) {
>>>  			reason_code = -ENETUNREACH;
>>>  			smc->sk.sk_err = -reason_code;
>>>
>>
>> Your fix helps, but I would like to follow the hint of Andreas Schwab, and split
>> the return value check like this:
>>
>> ---
>>  net/smc/smc_clc.c |   14 ++++++--------
>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> --- a/net/smc/smc_clc.c
>> +++ b/net/smc/smc_clc.c
>> @@ -446,14 +446,12 @@ int smc_clc_send_proposal(struct smc_soc
>>  	vec[i++].iov_len = sizeof(trl);
>>  	/* due to the few bytes needed for clc-handshake this cannot block */
>>  	len = kernel_sendmsg(smc->clcsock, &msg, vec, i, plen);
>> -	if (len < sizeof(pclc)) {
>> -		if (len >= 0) {
>> -			reason_code = -ENETUNREACH;
>> -			smc->sk.sk_err = -reason_code;
>> -		} else {
>> -			smc->sk.sk_err = smc->clcsock->sk->sk_err;
>> -			reason_code = -smc->sk.sk_err;
>> -		}
>> +	if (len < 0) {
>> +		smc->sk.sk_err = smc->clcsock->sk->sk_err;
>> +		reason_code = -smc->sk.sk_err;
>> +	} else if (len < (int)sizeof(pclc)) {
>> +		reason_code = -ENETUNREACH;
>> +		smc->sk.sk_err = -reason_code;
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	return reason_code;
>>
>> Agreed?
> 
> Yes, Need a new patch from me?
> 

Not necessary, I will make sure this patch version is added to the smc code.

>>
>> Regards, Ursula
>>
>>
>>
>