From: Dmitry V. Levin <hidden> Date: 2016-02-19 01:27:52
The value passed by unix_diag_get_exact to unix_lookup_by_ino has type
__u32, but unix_lookup_by_ino's argument ino has type int, which is not
a problem yet.
However, when ino is compared with sock_i_ino return value of type
unsigned long, ino is sign extended to signed long, and this results
to incorrect comparison on 64-bit architectures for inode numbers
greater than INT_MAX.
This bug was found by strace test suite.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry V. Levin <redacted>
Cc: <redacted>
---
net/unix/diag.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
From: Cong Wang <hidden> Date: 2016-02-20 00:21:17
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Dmitry V. Levin [off-list ref] wrote:
The value passed by unix_diag_get_exact to unix_lookup_by_ino has type
__u32, but unix_lookup_by_ino's argument ino has type int, which is not
a problem yet.
However, when ino is compared with sock_i_ino return value of type
unsigned long, ino is sign extended to signed long, and this results
to incorrect comparison on 64-bit architectures for inode numbers
greater than INT_MAX.
This bug was found by strace test suite.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry V. Levin <redacted>
Cc: <redacted>
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Date: 2016-02-20 04:50:04
From: Cong Wang <redacted>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 16:21:14 -0800
On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:27 PM, Dmitry V. Levin [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
The value passed by unix_diag_get_exact to unix_lookup_by_ino has type
__u32, but unix_lookup_by_ino's argument ino has type int, which is not
a problem yet.
However, when ino is compared with sock_i_ino return value of type
unsigned long, ino is sign extended to signed long, and this results
to incorrect comparison on 64-bit architectures for inode numbers
greater than INT_MAX.
This bug was found by strace test suite.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry V. Levin <redacted>
Cc: <redacted>