Re: [PATCH] sysctl: fix min/max handling in__do_proc_doulongvec_minmax()

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Thu Oct 07 2010 - 15:20:07 EST


On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:59:03 +0200
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Le jeudi 07 octobre 2010 __ 09:37 -0700, Eric W. Biederman a __crit :
>
> > The difference between long handling and int handling is a
> > usability issue. I don't expect we will be exporting new
> > vectors via sysctl, so the conversion of a handful of vectors
> > from int to long is where this is most likely to be used.
> >
> > I skimmed through all of what I presume are the current users
> > aka linux-2.6.36-rcX and there don't appear to be any users
> > of proc_dounlongvec_minmax that use it's vector properties there.
> >
> > Which doubly tells me that incrementing the min and max pointers
> > is not what we want to do.
> >
>
> Thats fine by me, thanks Eric.
>
> Andrew, please remove previous patch from your tree and replace it by
> following one :
>
> [PATCH v2] sysctl: fix min/max handling in __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax()
>
> When proc_doulongvec_minmax() is used with an array of longs,
> and no min/max check requested (.extra1 or .extra2 being NULL), we
> dereference a NULL pointer for the second element of the array.
>
> Noticed while doing some changes in network stack for the "16TB problem"
>
> Fix is to not change min & max pointers in
> __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(), so that all elements of the vector share
> an unique min/max limit, like proc_dointvec_minmax().
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> kernel/sysctl.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sysctl.c b/kernel/sysctl.c
> index f88552c..8e45451 100644
> --- a/kernel/sysctl.c
> +++ b/kernel/sysctl.c
> @@ -2485,7 +2485,7 @@ static int __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(void *data, struct ctl_table *table, int
> kbuf[left] = 0;
> }
>
> - for (; left && vleft--; i++, min++, max++, first=0) {
> + for (; left && vleft--; i++, first=0) {
> unsigned long val;
>
> if (write) {

Did we check to see whether any present callers are passing in pointers
to arrays of min/max values?

I wonder if there's any documentation for this interface which just
became wrong.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/