* Re: + sysctl-return-einval-if-val-violates-minmax.patch added to -mm tree [not found] <20190211210632.Nfd0f%akpm@linux-foundation.org> @ 2019-02-11 21:17 ` Alexey Dobriyan 2019-02-11 21:19 ` Christian Brauner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Alexey Dobriyan @ 2019-02-11 21:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: akpm Cc: linux-kernel, viro, mcgrof, longman, linux, keescook, joe.lawrence, ebiederm, christian On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:06:32PM -0800, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > @@ -2848,8 +2848,10 @@ static int __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(v > - if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) > - continue; > + if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) { > + err = -EINVAL; I was asked to return ERANGE in kstrto*(). If nothing, it gives better error message: $ ./a.out foo: Numerical result out of range ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: + sysctl-return-einval-if-val-violates-minmax.patch added to -mm tree 2019-02-11 21:17 ` + sysctl-return-einval-if-val-violates-minmax.patch added to -mm tree Alexey Dobriyan @ 2019-02-11 21:19 ` Christian Brauner 2019-02-11 21:25 ` Luis Chamberlain 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Christian Brauner @ 2019-02-11 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Alexey Dobriyan Cc: akpm, linux-kernel, viro, mcgrof, longman, linux, keescook, joe.lawrence, ebiederm On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 12:17:16AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:06:32PM -0800, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > > > @@ -2848,8 +2848,10 @@ static int __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(v > > > - if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) > > - continue; > > + if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) { > > + err = -EINVAL; > > I was asked to return ERANGE in kstrto*(). I think we discussed ERANGE vs EINVAL and decided EINVAL because there was precedence for other sysctls already. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: + sysctl-return-einval-if-val-violates-minmax.patch added to -mm tree 2019-02-11 21:19 ` Christian Brauner @ 2019-02-11 21:25 ` Luis Chamberlain 2019-02-11 21:32 ` Christian Brauner 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Luis Chamberlain @ 2019-02-11 21:25 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christian Brauner Cc: Alexey Dobriyan, akpm, linux-kernel, viro, longman, linux, keescook, joe.lawrence, ebiederm, linux-api On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:19:19PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 12:17:16AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:06:32PM -0800, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > > > > > @@ -2848,8 +2848,10 @@ static int __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(v > > > > > - if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) > > > - continue; > > > + if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) { > > > + err = -EINVAL; > > > > I was asked to return ERANGE in kstrto*(). > > I think we discussed ERANGE vs EINVAL and decided EINVAL because there > was precedence for other sysctls already. Can you do a proper audit and see? linux-api folks may care. Luis ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: + sysctl-return-einval-if-val-violates-minmax.patch added to -mm tree 2019-02-11 21:25 ` Luis Chamberlain @ 2019-02-11 21:32 ` Christian Brauner 2019-02-11 21:41 ` Luis Chamberlain 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Christian Brauner @ 2019-02-11 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Luis Chamberlain Cc: Alexey Dobriyan, akpm, linux-kernel, viro, longman, linux, keescook, joe.lawrence, ebiederm, linux-api On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:25:23PM -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:19:19PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 12:17:16AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:06:32PM -0800, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > > > > > > > @@ -2848,8 +2848,10 @@ static int __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(v > > > > > > > - if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) > > > > - continue; > > > > + if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) { > > > > + err = -EINVAL; > > > > > > I was asked to return ERANGE in kstrto*(). > > > > I think we discussed ERANGE vs EINVAL and decided EINVAL because there > > was precedence for other sysctls already. > > Can you do a proper audit and see? If you look at proc_get_long() right now you can see that when the buffer we use to parse the number is exceeded we return EINVAL. In short if you do right now: echo 1844674407370955161600000 > /proc/sys/fs/file-max that would exceed the buffer in proc_get_long() and you already get EINVAL for all such cases. If we now change this to ERANGE we would return: echo 18446744073709551616 > /proc/sys/fs/file-max -> ERANGE echo 1844674407370955161600000 > /proc/sys/fs/file-max -> EINVAL which would be very confusing. For consistency we should use EINVAL. See kernel/sysctl.c: /* We don't know if the next char is whitespace thus we may accept * invalid integers (e.g. 1234...a) or two integers instead of one * (e.g. 123...1). So lets not allow such large numbers. */ if (len == TMPBUFLEN - 1) return -EINVAL; Christian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: + sysctl-return-einval-if-val-violates-minmax.patch added to -mm tree 2019-02-11 21:32 ` Christian Brauner @ 2019-02-11 21:41 ` Luis Chamberlain 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Luis Chamberlain @ 2019-02-11 21:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christian Brauner Cc: Alexey Dobriyan, akpm, linux-kernel, viro, longman, linux, keescook, joe.lawrence, ebiederm, linux-api On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:32:50PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:25:23PM -0800, Luis Chamberlain wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 10:19:19PM +0100, Christian Brauner wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 12:17:16AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > > > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 01:06:32PM -0800, akpm@linux-foundation.org wrote: > > > > > > > > > @@ -2848,8 +2848,10 @@ static int __do_proc_doulongvec_minmax(v > > > > > > > > > - if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) > > > > > - continue; > > > > > + if ((min && val < *min) || (max && val > *max)) { > > > > > + err = -EINVAL; > > > > > > > > I was asked to return ERANGE in kstrto*(). > > > > > > I think we discussed ERANGE vs EINVAL and decided EINVAL because there > > > was precedence for other sysctls already. > > > > Can you do a proper audit and see? > > If you look at proc_get_long() right now you can see that when the > buffer we use to parse the number is exceeded we return EINVAL. In short > if you do right now: > > echo 1844674407370955161600000 > /proc/sys/fs/file-max > > that would exceed the buffer in proc_get_long() and you already get > EINVAL for all such cases. If we now change this to ERANGE we would > return: > > echo 18446744073709551616 > /proc/sys/fs/file-max -> ERANGE > echo 1844674407370955161600000 > /proc/sys/fs/file-max -> EINVAL > > which would be very confusing. For consistency we should use EINVAL. > > See kernel/sysctl.c: > > /* We don't know if the next char is whitespace thus we may accept > * invalid integers (e.g. 1234...a) or two integers instead of one > * (e.g. 123...1). So lets not allow such large numbers. */ > if (len == TMPBUFLEN - 1) > return -EINVAL; Thanks this works for me. Luis ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-02-11 21:41 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20190211210632.Nfd0f%akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2019-02-11 21:17 ` + sysctl-return-einval-if-val-violates-minmax.patch added to -mm tree Alexey Dobriyan
2019-02-11 21:19 ` Christian Brauner
2019-02-11 21:25 ` Luis Chamberlain
2019-02-11 21:32 ` Christian Brauner
2019-02-11 21:41 ` Luis Chamberlain
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.