On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:24 AM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 04:48:17PM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
>> Al, do you want me to mail the patch?
>> I won't be able to write a super detailed description, but I can do
>> some format patch.
>
> It's been fixed by commit c0eb027e5aef7; if y
On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 04:48:17PM +0200, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> Al, do you want me to mail the patch?
> I won't be able to write a super detailed description, but I can do
> some format patch.
It's been fixed by commit c0eb027e5aef7; if you are still able to
trigger it on the current mainline, p
On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 8:19 AM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:33:18PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>>
Added more debug output.
name_to_handle_at(r4, &(0
On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 3:17 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:33:18PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>
>>> Added more debug output.
>>>
>>> name_to_handle_at(r4, &(0x7f003000-0x6)="2e2f62757300",
>>> &(0x7f003000-0xd)={0
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:33:18PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
>> Added more debug output.
>>
>> name_to_handle_at(r4, &(0x7f003000-0x6)="2e2f62757300",
>> &(0x7f003000-0xd)={0xc, 0x0, "cd21"}, &(0x7f002000)=0x0,
>> 0x1000)
>>
>> actua
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:33:18PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
>> Added more debug output.
>>
>> name_to_handle_at(r4, &(0x7f003000-0x6)="2e2f62757300",
>> &(0x7f003000-0xd)={0xc, 0x0, "cd21"}, &(0x7f002000)=0x0,
>> 0x1000)
>>
>> actua
On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 06:33:18PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> Added more debug output.
>
> name_to_handle_at(r4, &(0x7f003000-0x6)="2e2f62757300",
> &(0x7f003000-0xd)={0xc, 0x0, "cd21"}, &(0x7f002000)=0x0,
> 0x1000)
>
> actually passes name="" because of the overlapping addresses.
On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 12:37:13PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> I am pretty sure it is that one.
> I don't think I ever used name_to_handle_at syscall in my life and I
> definitely didn't make it lookup a memfd :)
So what does it normally return? On the runs where we do not hit that
use-after-f
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 6:33 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 05:14:23PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>>> > On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 12:37:13PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>> >
>>
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 05:14:23PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>> > On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 12:37:13PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> >
>> >> I am pretty sure it is that one.
>> >> I don't think I e
On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 05:14:23PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 12:37:13PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> >
> >> I am pretty sure it is that one.
> >> I don't think I ever used name_to_handle_at syscall in my life and I
> >
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 05, 2017 at 12:37:13PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
>> I am pretty sure it is that one.
>> I don't think I ever used name_to_handle_at syscall in my life and I
>> definitely didn't make it lookup a memfd :)
>
> So what does it normally
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 03:59:36PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> I am getting the following use-after-free reports while running
> syzkaller fuzzer on 86292b33d4b79ee03e2f43ea0381ef85f077c760 (but also
> happened on 6dc39c
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 03:59:36PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>
>>> I am getting the following use-after-free reports while running
>>> syzkaller fuzzer on 86292b33d4b79ee03e2f43ea0381ef85f
On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Al Viro wrote:
>>> On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 03:59:36PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>>>
I am getting the following use-after-free reports while runn
On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 8:39 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 03:59:36PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
>
>> I am getting the following use-after-free reports while running
>> syzkaller fuzzer on 86292b33d4b79ee03e2f43ea0381ef85f077c760 (but also
>> happened on 6dc39c50e4aeb769c8ae06edf2b1
On Sat, Mar 04, 2017 at 03:59:36PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> I am getting the following use-after-free reports while running
> syzkaller fuzzer on 86292b33d4b79ee03e2f43ea0381ef85f077c760 (but also
> happened on 6dc39c50e4aeb769c8ae06edf2b1a732f3490913 and
> c82be9d2244aacea9851c86f4fb74694c99
Hello,
I am getting the following use-after-free reports while running
syzkaller fuzzer on 86292b33d4b79ee03e2f43ea0381ef85f077c760 (but also
happened on 6dc39c50e4aeb769c8ae06edf2b1a732f3490913 and
c82be9d2244aacea9851c86f4fb74694c99cd874).
===
18 matches
Mail list logo