2018-06-12 04:27:50

by Zhouyang Jia

Subject: [PATCH] integrity: add error handling for kmem_cache_create

When kmem_cache_create fails, the lack of error-handling code may
cause unexpected results.

This patch adds error-handling code after calling kmem_cache_create.

Signed-off-by: Zhouyang Jia <[email protected]>
---
security/integrity/iint.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)

diff --git a/security/integrity/iint.c b/security/integrity/iint.c
index 149faa8..c074fd8 100644
--- a/security/integrity/iint.c
+++ b/security/integrity/iint.c
@@ -172,6 +172,9 @@ static int __init integrity_iintcache_init(void)
iint_cache =
kmem_cache_create("iint_cache", sizeof(struct integrity_iint_cache),
0, SLAB_PANIC, init_once);
+ if (!iint_cache)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
return 0;
}
security_initcall(integrity_iintcache_init);
--
2.7.4

2018-06-13 20:31:40

by Mimi Zohar

Subject: Re: [PATCH] integrity: add error handling for kmem_cache_create

On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 12:27 +0800, Zhouyang Jia wrote:
> When kmem_cache_create fails, the lack of error-handling code may
> cause unexpected results.
>
> This patch adds error-handling code after calling kmem_cache_create.

The slab is being create during __init.  Under what circumstances do
you expect the allocation to fail?  Have you tested what happens if it
fails with/without at least an IMA measurement policy?

Mimi
  
>
> Signed-off-by: Zhouyang Jia <[email protected]>
> ---
> security/integrity/iint.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/security/integrity/iint.c b/security/integrity/iint.c
> index 149faa8..c074fd8 100644
> --- a/security/integrity/iint.c
> +++ b/security/integrity/iint.c
> @@ -172,6 +172,9 @@ static int __init integrity_iintcache_init(void)
> iint_cache =
> kmem_cache_create("iint_cache", sizeof(struct integrity_iint_cache),
> 0, SLAB_PANIC, init_once);
> + if (!iint_cache)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> return 0;
> }
> security_initcall(integrity_iintcache_init);