lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Apr]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 059/190] Revert "RDMA/srpt: Remove unnecessary assertion in srpt_queue_response"
On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 09:05:44AM -0700, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 4/21/21 7:05 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 11:02:47AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 02:58:54PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > > This reverts commit 9f48db0d4a08624bb9ba847ea40c8abad753b396.
> > > >
> > > > Commits from @umn.edu addresses have been found to be submitted in "bad
> > > > faith" to try to test the kernel community's ability to review "known
> > > > malicious" changes. The result of these submissions can be found in a
> > > > paper published at the 42nd IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
> > > > entitled, "Open Source Insecurity: Stealthily Introducing
> > > > Vulnerabilities via Hypocrite Commits" written by Qiushi Wu (University
> > > > of Minnesota) and Kangjie Lu (University of Minnesota).
> > > >
> > > > Because of this, all submissions from this group must be reverted from
> > > > the kernel tree and will need to be re-reviewed again to determine if
> > > > they actually are a valid fix. Until that work is complete, remove this
> > > > change to ensure that no problems are being introduced into the
> > > > codebase.
> > > >
> > > > Cc: https
> > > > Cc: Aditya Pakki <pakki001@umn.edu>
> > > > Cc: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>
> > > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
> > > > Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@mellanox.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > > > drivers/infiniband/ulp/srpt/ib_srpt.c | 2 ++
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > I think this one is fine
> >
> > Sorry, I realize that is unclear. I mean I don't see a reason to
> > revert this patch.
>
> Greg, I share Jason's opinion and would like to see this revert dropped. The
> function srpt_queue_response() dereferences the 'ch' pointer before the
> BUG_ON(ch) statement is reached. I think this makes the BUG_ON() statement
> that would be reintroduced by this revert superfluous.

Thanks for the review, I will go drop this commit from my tree.

greg k-h

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-04-27 16:24    [W:0.156 / U:2.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site