On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 09:23:43PM +0800, Peng Tao wrote: >> From: Amir Shehata <amir.sheh...@intel.com> >> >> The core of the issue is that the selftest module doesn't sanitize its >> own API, but it depends on lst utility to do such checks. As a result >> this issue manifests itself in this particular LU through an assert >> on an empty group. If the NID is misspelled then an empty group is >> added. An error output is provided, but if that's never checked in a >> batch script, as is the case with this issue, then the script will try >> to add an empty group to a test to run in a batch, and that will cause >> an assert >> >> The fix is two fold. Ensure that lst utility checks that a group is >> added with at least one node. If not the group is subsequently >> deleted. And the add_test command would fail, since the group no >> longer exists. >> >> The second fix is to ensure that the kernel module itself sanitizes >> its own API in this particular case, so that if a different utility is >> used other than lst to communicate with the selftest kernel module >> then this error would be caught. This fix looks up the batch and the >> groups, src and dst, in the ioctl handle and sanitizes that input at >> this point. If the group looked up either doesn't exist or doesn't >> have at least one ACTIVE node, then the command fails. >> >> NOTE:there are many other cases in the code where the selftest kernel >> module doesn't check for sanity of the input, but depends totally on >> the lst module to do such checks. Particularly around length of >> strings passed in. Thus it is possible to crash the selftest module >> if someone tries to create another userspace app to communicate with >> the selftest kernel module without ensuring sanity of the params sent >> to the kernel module. In effect, it's always assumed that lst is the >> front end for selftest and no other front end is to be used. > > This patch adds build warnings to the kernel build process, so I can't > apply it, sorry. Please fix that up before sending it again. > Hi Greg,
Can you please be explicit about what build warning you saw? I tried to reproduce it with gcc version 4.1.2 and 4.6.3 on my machine, but didn't see any build warnings with this patch applied. Thanks, Tao -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
