lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4.14 17/89] futex: Prevent overflow by strengthen input validation
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Jiri Slaby wrote:

> On 01/25/2018, 03:03 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, 25 Jan 2018, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >> On 01/22/2018, 09:44 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>> + if (nr_wake < 0 || nr_requeue < 0)
> >>> + return -EINVAL;
> >>
> >> This breaks strace's test suite on 4.14.15 (and is present in upstream
> >> obviously too):
> >> futex(0x7ff568b44ffc, 0x3, 0xfacefeed, 0xbadda7a0ca7b100d,
> >> 0x7ff568b44ffc, 0x9caffee1) = -1: Invalid argument
> >
> > And why the hell is strace expecting this to be valid?
>
> You ought to ask somebody else, I was confused the very same way:
>
> My FIX:
> https://github.com/strace/strace/pull/16/commits/777587ea509481666274df88671949b390f05cc3
>
> Their NACK:
> https://github.com/strace/strace/pull/16#issuecomment-341614984

https://github.com/strace/strace/commit/79d10dfc20985225e4ea044d3875c4cea09053d7

Update futex test in accordance with kernel's v4.15-rc7-202-gfbe0e83

* futex.c (VALP, VALP_PR, VAL2P, VAL2P_PR): New macro definitions.
(main): Allow EINVAL on *REQUEUE* checks with VAL/VAL2 with higher bit
being set, check that the existing behaviour preserved with VALP/VAL2P
where higher bit is unset.

So what's the problem?

Thanks,

tglx

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-25 15:31    [W:0.128 / U:11.180 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site