BDU:2024-09135

CVE-2024-26831

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1 Recently, handshake_req_destroy_test1 started failing: Expected handshake_req_destroy_test == req, but handshake_req_destroy_test == 0000000000000000 req == 0000000060f99b40 not ok 11 req_destroy works This is because "sock_release(sock)" was replaced with "fput(filp)" to address a memory leak. Note that sock_release() is synchronous but fput() usually delays the final close and clean-up. The delay is not consequential in the other cases that were changed but handshake_req_destroy_test1 is testing that handshake_req_cancel() followed by closing the file actually does call the ->hp_destroy method. Thus the PTR_EQ test at the end has to be sure that the final close is complete before it checks the pointer. We cannot use a completion here because if ->hp_destroy is never called (ie, there is an API bug) then the test will hang. Reported by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>

CVE-2024-26831

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1 Recently, handshake_req_destroy_test1 started failing: Expected handshake_req_destroy_test == req, but handshake_req_destroy_test == 0000000000000000 req == 0000000060f99b40 not ok 11 req_destroy works This is because "sock_release(sock)" was replaced with "fput(filp)" to address a memory leak. Note that sock_release() is synchronous but fput() usually delays the final close and clean-up. The delay is not consequential in the other cases that were changed but handshake_req_destroy_test1 is testing that handshake_req_cancel() followed by closing the file actually does call the ->hp_destroy method. Thus the PTR_EQ test at the end has to be sure that the final close is complete before it checks the pointer. We cannot use a completion here because if ->hp_destroy is never called (ie, there is an API bug) then the test will hang. Reported by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>

CVE-2024-26831

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1 Recently, handshake_req_destroy_test1 started failing: Expected handshake_req_destroy_test == req, but handshake_req_destroy_test == 0000000000000000 req == 0000000060f99b40 not ok 11 req_destroy works This is because "sock_release(sock)" was replaced with "fput(filp)" to address a memory leak. Note that sock_release() is synchronous but fput() usually delays the final close and clean-up. The delay is not consequential in the other cases that were changed but handshake_req_destroy_test1 is testing that handshake_req_cancel() followed by closing the file actually does call the ->hp_destroy method. Thus the PTR_EQ test at the end has to be sure that the final close is complete before it checks the pointer. We cannot use a completion here because if ->hp_destroy is never called (ie, there is an API bug) then the test will hang. Reported by: Guenter Roeck <linux

CVE-2024-26831

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: n ...

GHSA-mmcw-f5qh-65q3

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net/handshake: Fix handshake_req_destroy_test1 Recently, handshake_req_destroy_test1 started failing: Expected handshake_req_destroy_test == req, but handshake_req_destroy_test == 0000000000000000 req == 0000000060f99b40 not ok 11 req_destroy works This is because "sock_release(sock)" was replaced with "fput(filp)" to address a memory leak. Note that sock_release() is synchronous but fput() usually delays the final close and clean-up. The delay is not consequential in the other cases that were changed but handshake_req_destroy_test1 is testing that handshake_req_cancel() followed by closing the file actually does call the ->hp_destroy method. Thus the PTR_EQ test at the end has to be sure that the final close is complete before it checks the pointer. We cannot use a completion here because if ->hp_destroy is never called (ie, there is an API bug) then the test will hang. Reported by: Guenter Roeck <li...