Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-24 Thread Tetsuo Handa
Andrew Morton wrote: > > --- a/kernel/kmod.c > > +++ b/kernel/kmod.c > > @@ -571,6 +571,10 @@ int call_usermodehelper_exec(struct subprocess_info > > *sub_info, int wait) > > DECLARE_COMPLETION_ONSTACK(done); > > int retval = 0; > > > > + if (!sub_info->path) { > > + call_use

Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-23 Thread Andrew Morton
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 06:12:34 +0900 Tetsuo Handa wrote: > Andrew, would you pick up this patch? > > Regards. > -- > >From d6ff218545060c5f8b75b15d5b34bffcf625508f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Tetsuo Handa > Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 02:19:10 +0900 > Subje

[PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-23 Thread Tetsuo Handa
Andrew, would you pick up this patch? Regards. -- >From d6ff218545060c5f8b75b15d5b34bffcf625508f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tetsuo Handa Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 02:19:10 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec(). If /proc/sys/kernel/core_patt

Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-15 Thread Oleg Nesterov
Argh... Tetsuo, I am sorry. Not only I am stupid, I managed to confuse you. On 09/16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov I tried to ack you previous version which I wrongly blamed ;) However, I agree with this version as well. Feel free to use either one, you have my ack in any ca

Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-15 Thread Tetsuo Handa
>From d6ff218545060c5f8b75b15d5b34bffcf625508f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tetsuo Handa Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 02:19:10 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec(). If /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern contains only "|", NULL pointer dereference happ

Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-15 Thread Oleg Nesterov
On 09/16, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > It looks a bit ugly to check ->path under helper_lock(), just add > > > > if (!sub_info->path) > > retval = -ENOENT; > > > > at the start. Otherwise the code looks as if there is a subtle > > reason to take the lock before t

Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-15 Thread Tetsuo Handa
Oleg Nesterov wrote: > It looks a bit ugly to check ->path under helper_lock(), just add > > if (!sub_info->path) > retval = -ENOENT; > > at the start. Otherwise the code looks as if there is a subtle > reason to take the lock before this check. Did you mean this? DE

Re: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-15 Thread Oleg Nesterov
ACK, but... On 09/15, Tetsuo Handa wrote: > > @@ -572,6 +572,10 @@ int call_usermodehelper_exec(struct subprocess_info > *sub_info, int wait) > int retval = 0; > > helper_lock(); > + if (!sub_info->path) { > + retval = -ENOENT; > + goto out; > + } Ma

[PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec().

2013-09-15 Thread Tetsuo Handa
>From fe6723ba2816b42e26697472a3f2a3045614032b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tetsuo Handa Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2013 23:17:15 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] kmod: Check for NULL at call_usermodehelper_exec(). If /proc/sys/kernel/core_pattern contains only "|", NULL pointer dereference happ