On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 09:16:18PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > From: Florian Westphal <fw@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > [ Upstream commit fa5950e498e7face21a1761f327e6c1152f778c3 ] > > > > None of these spots really needs to crash the kernel. > > In one two cases we can jsut report error to userspace, in the other > > cases we can just use WARN_ON (and leak memory instead). > > Do these conditions trigger for someone, to warrant -stable patch? > > > +++ b/net/netfilter/nft_cmp.c > > @@ -79,7 +79,8 @@ static int nft_cmp_init(const struct nft_ctx *ctx, const struct nft_expr *expr, > > > > err = nft_data_init(NULL, &priv->data, sizeof(priv->data), &desc, > > tb[NFTA_CMP_DATA]); > > - BUG_ON(err < 0); > > + if (err < 0) > > + return err; > > > > priv->sreg = nft_parse_register(tb[NFTA_CMP_SREG]); > > err = nft_validate_register_load(priv->sreg, desc.len); > > @@ -129,7 +130,8 @@ static int nft_cmp_fast_init(const struct nft_ctx *ctx, > > > > err = nft_data_init(NULL, &data, sizeof(data), &desc, > > tb[NFTA_CMP_DATA]); > > - BUG_ON(err < 0); > > + if (err < 0) > > + return err; > > > > priv->sreg = nft_parse_register(tb[NFTA_CMP_SREG]); > > err = nft_validate_register_load(priv->sreg, desc.len); > > This goes from "kill kernel with backtrace" to "silently return > failure". Should WARN_ON() be preserved here? if this can be triggered, then the people running with panic-on-warn would reboot. It's best to handle it properly here. And it isn't "silent", the error is returned. thanks, greg k-h
