[PATCH v2] net: fix NULL pointer reference in cipso_v4_doi_free

David Miller davem at davemloft.net
Wed Sep 1 10:45:00 UTC 2021

From: 王贇 <yun.wang at linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 17:41:00 +0800

> On 2021/9/1 下午5:30, David Miller wrote:
>> From: 王贇 <yun.wang at linux.alibaba.com>
>> Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:51:28 +0800
>>> On 2021/8/31 下午9:48, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 10:42 PM 王贇 <yun.wang at linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2021/8/31 上午12:50, Paul Moore wrote:
>>>>> [SNIP]
>>>>>>>>> Reported-by: Abaci <abaci at linux.alibaba.com>
>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Wang <yun.wang at linux.alibaba.com>
>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>  net/netlabel/netlabel_cipso_v4.c | 4 ++--
>>>>>>>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>> I see this was already merged, but it looks good to me, thanks for
>>>>>>>> making those changes.
>>>>>>> FWIW it looks like v1 was also merged:
>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/netdev/net.git/commit/?id=733c99ee8b
>>>>>> Yeah, that is unfortunate, there was a brief discussion about that
>>>>>> over on one of the -stable patches for the v1 patch (odd that I never
>>>>>> saw a patchbot post for the v1 patch?).  Having both merged should be
>>>>>> harmless, but we want to revert the v1 patch as soon as we can.
>>>>>> Michael, can you take care of this?
>>>>> As v1 already merged, may be we could just goon with it?
>>>>> Actually both working to fix the problem, v1 will cover all the
>>>>> cases, v2 take care one case since that's currently the only one,
>>>>> but maybe there will be more in future.
>>>> No.  Please revert v1 and stick with the v2 patch.  The v1 patch is in
>>>> my opinion a rather ugly hack that addresses the symptom of the
>>>> problem and not the root cause.
>>>> It isn't your fault that both v1 and v2 were merged, but I'm asking
>>>> you to help cleanup the mess.  If you aren't able to do that please
>>>> let us know so that others can fix this properly.
>>> No problem I can help on that, just try to make sure it's not a
>>> meaningless work.
>>> So would it be fine to send out a v3 which revert v1 and apply v2?
>> Please don't do things this way just send the relative change.
> Could you please check the patch:
> Revert "net: fix NULL pointer reference in cipso_v4_doi_free"
> see if that's the right way?

It is not. Please just send a patch against the net GIT tree which relatively changes the code to match v2 of your change.

Thank you.

More information about the Linux-security-module-archive mailing list