| Message ID | 1286490135.6536.75.camel@edumazet-laptop |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:22:15 +0200 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote: > Le vendredi 08 octobre 2010 __ 00:06 +0200, Jiri Slaby a __crit : > > On 10/07/2010 11:08 PM, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > > > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2010-10-07-14-08 has been uploaded to > > > > Hi, I got bunch of "sysctl table check failed" below. All seem to be > > related to ipv4: > > I would say, sysctl check is buggy :( > > min/max are optional > > [PATCH] sysctl: min/max bounds are optional > > sysctl check complains when proc_doulongvec_minmax or > proc_doulongvec_ms_jiffies_minmax are used by a vector of longs (with > more than one element), with no min or max value specified. > > This is unexpected, given we had a bug on this min/max handling :) > > Reported-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> > --- > kernel/sysctl_check.c | 9 --------- > 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/sysctl_check.c b/kernel/sysctl_check.c > index 04cdcf7..10b90d8 100644 > --- a/kernel/sysctl_check.c > +++ b/kernel/sysctl_check.c > @@ -143,15 +143,6 @@ int sysctl_check_table(struct nsproxy *namespaces, struct ctl_table *table) > if (!table->maxlen) > set_fail(&fail, table, "No maxlen"); > } > - if ((table->proc_handler == proc_doulongvec_minmax) || > - (table->proc_handler == proc_doulongvec_ms_jiffies_minmax)) { > - if (table->maxlen > sizeof (unsigned long)) { > - if (!table->extra1) > - set_fail(&fail, table, "No min"); > - if (!table->extra2) > - set_fail(&fail, table, "No max"); > - } > - } > #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL > if (table->procname && !table->proc_handler) > set_fail(&fail, table, "No proc_handler"); That will probably fix it ;) net-avoid-limits-overflow.patch is dependent on this patch. Unless Eric B squeaks I'll plan on sending this patch in for 2.6.37. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes: > On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:22:15 +0200 > Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Le vendredi 08 octobre 2010 __ 00:06 +0200, Jiri Slaby a __crit : >> > On 10/07/2010 11:08 PM, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: >> > > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2010-10-07-14-08 has been uploaded to >> > >> > Hi, I got bunch of "sysctl table check failed" below. All seem to be >> > related to ipv4: >> >> I would say, sysctl check is buggy :( >> >> min/max are optional >> >> [PATCH] sysctl: min/max bounds are optional >> >> sysctl check complains when proc_doulongvec_minmax or >> proc_doulongvec_ms_jiffies_minmax are used by a vector of longs (with >> more than one element), with no min or max value specified. >> >> This is unexpected, given we had a bug on this min/max handling :) >> >> Reported-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> >> --- >> kernel/sysctl_check.c | 9 --------- >> 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/sysctl_check.c b/kernel/sysctl_check.c >> index 04cdcf7..10b90d8 100644 >> --- a/kernel/sysctl_check.c >> +++ b/kernel/sysctl_check.c >> @@ -143,15 +143,6 @@ int sysctl_check_table(struct nsproxy *namespaces, struct ctl_table *table) >> if (!table->maxlen) >> set_fail(&fail, table, "No maxlen"); >> } >> - if ((table->proc_handler == proc_doulongvec_minmax) || >> - (table->proc_handler == proc_doulongvec_ms_jiffies_minmax)) { >> - if (table->maxlen > sizeof (unsigned long)) { >> - if (!table->extra1) >> - set_fail(&fail, table, "No min"); >> - if (!table->extra2) >> - set_fail(&fail, table, "No max"); >> - } >> - } >> #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL >> if (table->procname && !table->proc_handler) >> set_fail(&fail, table, "No proc_handler"); > > That will probably fix it ;) > > net-avoid-limits-overflow.patch is dependent on this patch. Unless > Eric B squeaks I'll plan on sending this patch in for 2.6.37. Oh. I see. I actually had a sanity check for the case that was failing. I probably spotted the buggy code and wanted to see if there was anything that cared. So sysctl_check was perfectly correct until the bug was removed from proc_doulongvec_minmax. Which also means we have been auditing the kernel for quite a while to make certain that it is safe not to increment min and max. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, Oct 07, 2010 at 03:28:06PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:22:15 +0200 >Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Le vendredi 08 octobre 2010 __ 00:06 +0200, Jiri Slaby a __crit : >> > On 10/07/2010 11:08 PM, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: >> > > The mm-of-the-moment snapshot 2010-10-07-14-08 has been uploaded to >> > >> > Hi, I got bunch of "sysctl table check failed" below. All seem to be >> > related to ipv4: >> >> I would say, sysctl check is buggy :( >> >> min/max are optional >> >> [PATCH] sysctl: min/max bounds are optional >> >> sysctl check complains when proc_doulongvec_minmax or >> proc_doulongvec_ms_jiffies_minmax are used by a vector of longs (with >> more than one element), with no min or max value specified. >> >> This is unexpected, given we had a bug on this min/max handling :) >> >> Reported-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> >> --- >> kernel/sysctl_check.c | 9 --------- >> 1 file changed, 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/kernel/sysctl_check.c b/kernel/sysctl_check.c >> index 04cdcf7..10b90d8 100644 >> --- a/kernel/sysctl_check.c >> +++ b/kernel/sysctl_check.c >> @@ -143,15 +143,6 @@ int sysctl_check_table(struct nsproxy *namespaces, struct ctl_table *table) >> if (!table->maxlen) >> set_fail(&fail, table, "No maxlen"); >> } >> - if ((table->proc_handler == proc_doulongvec_minmax) || >> - (table->proc_handler == proc_doulongvec_ms_jiffies_minmax)) { >> - if (table->maxlen > sizeof (unsigned long)) { >> - if (!table->extra1) >> - set_fail(&fail, table, "No min"); >> - if (!table->extra2) >> - set_fail(&fail, table, "No max"); >> - } >> - } >> #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL >> if (table->procname && !table->proc_handler) >> set_fail(&fail, table, "No proc_handler"); > >That will probably fix it ;) Yeah, it looks good for me too, Acked-by: WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> > >net-avoid-limits-overflow.patch is dependent on this patch. Unless >Eric B squeaks I'll plan on sending this patch in for 2.6.37. > Eirc B reminded me we should check the code in sysctl_check.c, but I forgot. The patch from Eric D is exactly what we need here. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/kernel/sysctl_check.c b/kernel/sysctl_check.c index 04cdcf7..10b90d8 100644 --- a/kernel/sysctl_check.c +++ b/kernel/sysctl_check.c @@ -143,15 +143,6 @@ int sysctl_check_table(struct nsproxy *namespaces, struct ctl_table *table) if (!table->maxlen) set_fail(&fail, table, "No maxlen"); } - if ((table->proc_handler == proc_doulongvec_minmax) || - (table->proc_handler == proc_doulongvec_ms_jiffies_minmax)) { - if (table->maxlen > sizeof (unsigned long)) { - if (!table->extra1) - set_fail(&fail, table, "No min"); - if (!table->extra2) - set_fail(&fail, table, "No max"); - } - } #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_SYSCTL if (table->procname && !table->proc_handler) set_fail(&fail, table, "No proc_handler");