Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1283981

Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 9:51 PM, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> (adding lkml as this is likely better discussed there)
>
> On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:42 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
>> On 12/03/2015 03:24 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>> > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 15:10 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
>> > > On 12/03/2015 03:03 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
>> > > > On Thu, 2015-12-03 at 14:32 -0500, Jason Baron wrote:
>> > > > > On 12/03/2015 01:52 PM, Aaron Conole wrote:
>> > > > > > I think that as a minimum, the following patch should be evaluted,
>> > > > > > but am unsure to whom I should submit it (after I test):
>> > > > []
>> > > > > Agreed - the intention here is certainly to have no side effects. It
>> > > > > looks like 'no_printk()' is used in quite a few other places that would
>> > > > > benefit from this change. So we probably want a generic
>> > > > > 'really_no_printk()' macro.
>> > > >
>> > > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/6/17/231
>> > >
>> > > I don't see this in the tree.
>> >
>> > It never got applied.
>> >
>> > > Also maybe we should just convert
>> > > no_printk() to do what your 'eliminated_printk()'.
>> >
>> > Some of them at least.
>> >
>> > > So we can convert all users with this change?
>> >
>> > I don't think so, I think there are some
>> > function evaluation/side effects that are
>> > required.  I believe some do hardware I/O.
>> >
>> > It'd be good to at least isolate them.
>> >
>> > I'm not sure how to find them via some
>> > automated tool/mechanism though.
>> >
>> > I asked Julia Lawall about it once in this
>> > thread:  https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/12/3/696
>> >
>>
>> Seems rather fragile to have side effects that we rely
>> upon hidden in a printk().
>
> Yup.
>
>> Just convert them and see what breaks :)
>
> I appreciate your optimism.  It's very 1995.
> Try it and see what happens.


But Aaron says that DYNAMIC_DEBUG is enabled in most major
distributions, and all these side-effects don't happen with
DYNAMIC_DEBUG. This suggests that we can make these side-effects not
happen without DYNAMIC_DEBUG as well.
Or I am missing something here?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2015-12-03 22:00 +0100
  Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2015-12-04 11:50 +0100
    Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com> - 2015-12-04 14:00 +0100
      Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com> - 2015-12-04 16:40 +0100
        Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> - 2015-12-04 17:00 +0100
  Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com> - 2015-12-04 17:20 +0100
    Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com> - 2015-12-04 17:50 +0100
      Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2015-12-04 18:10 +0100
        Re: use-after-free in sctp_do_sm Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com> - 2015-12-04 18:20 +0100

csiph-web