[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 09:20:16 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc: "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Laura Abbott
<labbott@...hat.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>, Daniel Micay
<danielmicay@...il.com>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>, Arnd Bergmann
<arnd@...db.de>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Josh
Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers
<mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, "Kirill A. Shutemov"
<kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, Andrew Morton
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Thomas
Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Josef Bacik <jbacik@...com>, Andrey Ryabinin
<aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, Nikolay Aleksandrov
<nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] bug: Provide toggle for BUG on data corruption
On Tue, 16 Aug 2016 17:20:28 -0700
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> wrote:
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__list_add_valid);
> @@ -46,26 +41,18 @@ bool __list_del_entry_valid(struct list_head *entry)
> prev = entry->prev;
> next = entry->next;
>
> - if (unlikely(next == LIST_POISON1)) {
> - WARN(1, "list_del corruption, %p->next is LIST_POISON1 (%p)\n",
> - entry, LIST_POISON1);
> - return false;
> - }
> - if (unlikely(prev == LIST_POISON2)) {
> - WARN(1, "list_del corruption, %p->prev is LIST_POISON2 (%p)\n",
> - entry, LIST_POISON2);
> - return false;
> - }
> - if (unlikely(prev->next != entry)) {
> - WARN(1, "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, but was %p\n",
> - entry, prev->next);
> - return false;
> - }
> - if (unlikely(next->prev != entry)) {
> - WARN(1, "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, but was %p\n",
> - entry, next->prev);
> - return false;
> - }
> + CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next == LIST_POISON1,
> + "list_del corruption, %p->next is LIST_POISON1 (%p)\n",
> + entry, LIST_POISON1);
> + CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev == LIST_POISON2,
> + "list_del corruption, %p->prev is LIST_POISON2 (%p)\n",
> + entry, LIST_POISON2);
> + CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(prev->next != entry,
> + "list_del corruption. prev->next should be %p, but was %p\n",
> + entry, prev->next);
> + CHECK_DATA_CORRUPTION(next->prev != entry,
> + "list_del corruption. next->prev should be %p, but was %p\n",
> + entry, next->prev);
OK, you totally rewrote the WARN() section anyway, thus ignore my
comment on the previous email.
-- Steve
> return true;
>
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
