* [PATCH 1/2] pstore: fix NULL pointer fault if get NULL prz in ramoops_get_next_prz
@ 2014-03-11 6:15 Liu ShuoX
2014-03-11 6:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] pstore: correct the max_dump_cnt clearing of ramoops Liu ShuoX
2014-03-11 20:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] pstore: fix NULL pointer fault if get NULL prz in ramoops_get_next_prz Kees Cook
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Liu ShuoX @ 2014-03-11 6:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: anton, ccross, keescook, tony.luck, yanmin_zhang
These two patches are applied on top of patches:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/3/368
It has been added in -mm tree. Below is the first patch, and i will
send the second by replying this one.
From: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
ramoops_get_next_prz get the prz according the paramters. If it get a
uninitialized prz, access its members by following persistent_ram_old_size(prz)
will cause a NULL pointer crash.
Ex: if ftrace_size is 0, fprz will be NULL.
Fix it by return NULL in advance.
Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
---
fs/pstore/ram.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
index 1daed28..6f96d8c 100644
--- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
+++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
@@ -119,6 +119,8 @@ ramoops_get_next_prz(struct persistent_ram_zone *przs[], uint *c, uint max,
return NULL;
prz = przs[i];
+ if (!prz)
+ return NULL;
/* Update old/shadowed buffer. */
if (update)
--
1.8.3.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] pstore: correct the max_dump_cnt clearing of ramoops
2014-03-11 6:15 [PATCH 1/2] pstore: fix NULL pointer fault if get NULL prz in ramoops_get_next_prz Liu ShuoX
@ 2014-03-11 6:17 ` Liu ShuoX
2014-03-11 20:37 ` Kees Cook
2014-03-11 20:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] pstore: fix NULL pointer fault if get NULL prz in ramoops_get_next_prz Kees Cook
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Liu ShuoX @ 2014-03-11 6:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: anton, ccross, keescook, tony.luck, yanmin_zhang
From: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
In case that ramoops_init_przs failed, max_dump_cnt won't be reset to
zero in error handle path.
Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
---
fs/pstore/ram.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
index 6f96d8c..522e530 100644
--- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
+++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
@@ -326,6 +326,7 @@ static void ramoops_free_przs(struct ramoops_context *cxt)
for (i = 0; !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(cxt->przs[i]); i++)
persistent_ram_free(cxt->przs[i]);
kfree(cxt->przs);
+ cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
}
static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct ramoops_context *cxt,
@@ -350,7 +351,7 @@ static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct ramoops_context *cxt,
GFP_KERNEL);
if (!cxt->przs) {
dev_err(dev, "failed to initialize a prz array for dumps\n");
- return -ENOMEM;
+ goto fail_prz;
}
for (i = 0; i < cxt->max_dump_cnt; i++) {
@@ -508,7 +509,6 @@ fail_buf:
kfree(cxt->pstore.buf);
fail_clear:
cxt->pstore.bufsize = 0;
- cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
fail_cnt:
kfree(cxt->fprz);
fail_init_fprz:
--
1.8.3.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] pstore: fix NULL pointer fault if get NULL prz in ramoops_get_next_prz
2014-03-11 6:15 [PATCH 1/2] pstore: fix NULL pointer fault if get NULL prz in ramoops_get_next_prz Liu ShuoX
2014-03-11 6:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] pstore: correct the max_dump_cnt clearing of ramoops Liu ShuoX
@ 2014-03-11 20:30 ` Kees Cook
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2014-03-11 20:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Liu ShuoX; +Cc: LKML, Anton Vorontsov, Colin Cross, Tony Luck, yanmin_zhang
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com> wrote:
> These two patches are applied on top of patches:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/3/368
> It has been added in -mm tree. Below is the first patch, and i will
> send the second by replying this one.
>
> From: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
>
> ramoops_get_next_prz get the prz according the paramters. If it get a
> uninitialized prz, access its members by following
> persistent_ram_old_size(prz)
> will cause a NULL pointer crash.
> Ex: if ftrace_size is 0, fprz will be NULL.
>
> Fix it by return NULL in advance.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
Thanks!
Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
-Kees
> ---
> fs/pstore/ram.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> index 1daed28..6f96d8c 100644
> --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
> +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> @@ -119,6 +119,8 @@ ramoops_get_next_prz(struct persistent_ram_zone *przs[],
> uint *c, uint max,
> return NULL;
> prz = przs[i];
> + if (!prz)
> + return NULL;
> /* Update old/shadowed buffer. */
> if (update)
> --
> 1.8.3.2
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] pstore: correct the max_dump_cnt clearing of ramoops
2014-03-11 6:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] pstore: correct the max_dump_cnt clearing of ramoops Liu ShuoX
@ 2014-03-11 20:37 ` Kees Cook
2014-03-12 9:48 ` Liu ShuoX
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2014-03-11 20:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Liu ShuoX; +Cc: LKML, Anton Vorontsov, Colin Cross, Tony Luck, yanmin_zhang
On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com> wrote:
> From: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
>
> In case that ramoops_init_przs failed, max_dump_cnt won't be reset to
> zero in error handle path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
> ---
> fs/pstore/ram.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> index 6f96d8c..522e530 100644
> --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
> +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> @@ -326,6 +326,7 @@ static void ramoops_free_przs(struct ramoops_context
> *cxt)
> for (i = 0; !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(cxt->przs[i]); i++)
> persistent_ram_free(cxt->przs[i]);
> kfree(cxt->przs);
> + cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
> }
> static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct ramoops_context
> *cxt,
> @@ -350,7 +351,7 @@ static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct
> ramoops_context *cxt,
> GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!cxt->przs) {
> dev_err(dev, "failed to initialize a prz array for
> dumps\n");
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + goto fail_prz;
This will have no effect. If cxt->przs == NULL, ramoops_free_przs will
immediately exit too, not hitting your max_dump_cnt = 0 change.
Perhaps move the =0 in that function to the top before the check and
return?
> }
> for (i = 0; i < cxt->max_dump_cnt; i++) {
> @@ -508,7 +509,6 @@ fail_buf:
> kfree(cxt->pstore.buf);
> fail_clear:
> cxt->pstore.bufsize = 0;
> - cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
> fail_cnt:
> kfree(cxt->fprz);
> fail_init_fprz:
> --
> 1.8.3.2
>
Otherwise, yes, once fixed, this clean-up looks good -- it keeps the
variable initialization and cleanup all in ramoops_init_przs() which
is how it should be.
Thanks!
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] pstore: correct the max_dump_cnt clearing of ramoops
2014-03-11 20:37 ` Kees Cook
@ 2014-03-12 9:48 ` Liu ShuoX
2014-03-12 14:55 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Liu ShuoX @ 2014-03-12 9:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kees Cook; +Cc: LKML, Anton Vorontsov, Colin Cross, Tony Luck, yanmin_zhang
On Tue 11.Mar'14 at 13:37:23 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>> From: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
>>
>> In case that ramoops_init_przs failed, max_dump_cnt won't be reset to
>> zero in error handle path.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
>> ---
>> fs/pstore/ram.c | 4 ++--
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
>> index 6f96d8c..522e530 100644
>> --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
>> +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
>> @@ -326,6 +326,7 @@ static void ramoops_free_przs(struct ramoops_context
>> *cxt)
>> for (i = 0; !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(cxt->przs[i]); i++)
>> persistent_ram_free(cxt->przs[i]);
>> kfree(cxt->przs);
>> + cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
>> }
>> static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct ramoops_context
>> *cxt,
>> @@ -350,7 +351,7 @@ static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct
>> ramoops_context *cxt,
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>> if (!cxt->przs) {
>> dev_err(dev, "failed to initialize a prz array for
>> dumps\n");
>> - return -ENOMEM;
>> + goto fail_prz;
>
>This will have no effect. If cxt->przs == NULL, ramoops_free_przs will
>immediately exit too, not hitting your max_dump_cnt = 0 change.
>Perhaps move the =0 in that function to the top before the check and
>return?
Yes, you are right. Below has the latest patch which move the =0 to the
top of that function, just as you mentioned. Thanks.
>
>> }
>> for (i = 0; i < cxt->max_dump_cnt; i++) {
>> @@ -508,7 +509,6 @@ fail_buf:
>> kfree(cxt->pstore.buf);
>> fail_clear:
>> cxt->pstore.bufsize = 0;
>> - cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
>> fail_cnt:
>> kfree(cxt->fprz);
>> fail_init_fprz:
>> --
>> 1.8.3.2
>>
>
>Otherwise, yes, once fixed, this clean-up looks good -- it keeps the
>variable initialization and cleanup all in ramoops_init_przs() which
>is how it should be.
>
>Thanks!
>
>-Kees
-----
From: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
In case that ramoops_init_przs failed, max_dump_cnt won't be reset to
zero in error handle path.
Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
---
fs/pstore/ram.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
index 6f96d8c..3b57443 100644
--- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
+++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
@@ -320,6 +320,7 @@ static void ramoops_free_przs(struct ramoops_context *cxt)
{
int i;
+ cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
if (!cxt->przs)
return;
@@ -350,7 +351,7 @@ static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct ramoops_context *cxt,
GFP_KERNEL);
if (!cxt->przs) {
dev_err(dev, "failed to initialize a prz array for dumps\n");
- return -ENOMEM;
+ goto fail_prz;
}
for (i = 0; i < cxt->max_dump_cnt; i++) {
@@ -508,7 +509,6 @@ fail_buf:
kfree(cxt->pstore.buf);
fail_clear:
cxt->pstore.bufsize = 0;
- cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
fail_cnt:
kfree(cxt->fprz);
fail_init_fprz:
--
1.8.3.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] pstore: correct the max_dump_cnt clearing of ramoops
2014-03-12 9:48 ` Liu ShuoX
@ 2014-03-12 14:55 ` Kees Cook
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Kees Cook @ 2014-03-12 14:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Liu ShuoX; +Cc: LKML, Anton Vorontsov, Colin Cross, Tony Luck, yanmin_zhang
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com> wrote:
> On Tue 11.Mar'14 at 13:37:23 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> From: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
>>>
>>> In case that ramoops_init_przs failed, max_dump_cnt won't be reset to
>>> zero in error handle path.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> fs/pstore/ram.c | 4 ++--
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
>>> index 6f96d8c..522e530 100644
>>> --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
>>> +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
>>> @@ -326,6 +326,7 @@ static void ramoops_free_przs(struct ramoops_context
>>> *cxt)
>>> for (i = 0; !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(cxt->przs[i]); i++)
>>> persistent_ram_free(cxt->przs[i]);
>>> kfree(cxt->przs);
>>> + cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
>>> }
>>> static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct ramoops_context
>>> *cxt,
>>> @@ -350,7 +351,7 @@ static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev,
>>> struct
>>> ramoops_context *cxt,
>>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>> if (!cxt->przs) {
>>> dev_err(dev, "failed to initialize a prz array for
>>> dumps\n");
>>> - return -ENOMEM;
>>> + goto fail_prz;
>>
>>
>> This will have no effect. If cxt->przs == NULL, ramoops_free_przs will
>> immediately exit too, not hitting your max_dump_cnt = 0 change.
>> Perhaps move the =0 in that function to the top before the check and
>> return?
>
> Yes, you are right. Below has the latest patch which move the =0 to the
> top of that function, just as you mentioned. Thanks.
>
>>
>>> }
>>> for (i = 0; i < cxt->max_dump_cnt; i++) {
>>> @@ -508,7 +509,6 @@ fail_buf:
>>> kfree(cxt->pstore.buf);
>>> fail_clear:
>>> cxt->pstore.bufsize = 0;
>>> - cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
>>> fail_cnt:
>>> kfree(cxt->fprz);
>>> fail_init_fprz:
>>> --
>>> 1.8.3.2
>>>
>>
>> Otherwise, yes, once fixed, this clean-up looks good -- it keeps the
>> variable initialization and cleanup all in ramoops_init_przs() which
>> is how it should be.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> -Kees
>
> -----
>
>
> From: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
>
> In case that ramoops_init_przs failed, max_dump_cnt won't be reset to
> zero in error handle path.
>
> Signed-off-by: Liu ShuoX <shuox.liu@intel.com>
Thanks! Looks right now.
Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
-Kees
> ---
> fs/pstore/ram.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> index 6f96d8c..3b57443 100644
> --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c
> +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c
> @@ -320,6 +320,7 @@ static void ramoops_free_przs(struct ramoops_context
> *cxt)
> {
> int i;
>
> + cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
> if (!cxt->przs)
> return;
>
> @@ -350,7 +351,7 @@ static int ramoops_init_przs(struct device *dev, struct
> ramoops_context *cxt,
> GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!cxt->przs) {
> dev_err(dev, "failed to initialize a prz array for
> dumps\n");
> - return -ENOMEM;
> + goto fail_prz;
> }
> for (i = 0; i < cxt->max_dump_cnt; i++) {
> @@ -508,7 +509,6 @@ fail_buf:
> kfree(cxt->pstore.buf);
> fail_clear:
> cxt->pstore.bufsize = 0;
> - cxt->max_dump_cnt = 0;
> fail_cnt:
> kfree(cxt->fprz);
> fail_init_fprz:
> --
> 1.8.3.2
>
--
Kees Cook
Chrome OS Security
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-03-12 14:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-03-11 6:15 [PATCH 1/2] pstore: fix NULL pointer fault if get NULL prz in ramoops_get_next_prz Liu ShuoX
2014-03-11 6:17 ` [PATCH 2/2] pstore: correct the max_dump_cnt clearing of ramoops Liu ShuoX
2014-03-11 20:37 ` Kees Cook
2014-03-12 9:48 ` Liu ShuoX
2014-03-12 14:55 ` Kees Cook
2014-03-11 20:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] pstore: fix NULL pointer fault if get NULL prz in ramoops_get_next_prz Kees Cook
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®