From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932653AbeAOI5s (ORCPT + 1 other); Mon, 15 Jan 2018 03:57:48 -0500 Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.63.242]:34190 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932252AbeAOI5r (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jan 2018 03:57:47 -0500 Message-ID: <1516006661.410.6.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: WARNING in rfkill_alloc From: Johannes Berg To: syzbot , davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 09:57:41 +0100 In-Reply-To: <089e08282cc03493040562b0079c@google.com> (sfid-20180113_233741_097318_E11B1EAC) References: <089e08282cc03493040562b0079c@google.com> (sfid-20180113_233741_097318_E11B1EAC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.2-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Hi, > RIP: 0010:rfkill_alloc+0x2c0/0x380 net/rfkill/core.c:930 This seems pretty obvious - there's no name given. > wiphy_new_nm+0x159c/0x21d0 net/wireless/core.c:487 > ieee80211_alloc_hw_nm+0x4b4/0x2140 net/mac80211/main.c:531 which is strange, because we try to validate the name here. Can you help me read this? sendmsg$nl_generic(r1, &(0x7f0000b3e000-0x38)={&(0x7f0000d4a000- 0xc)={0x10, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0}, 0xc, &(0x7f0000007000)={&(0x7f00001ca000)={0x14, 0x1c, 0x109, 0xffffffffffffffff, 0xffffffffffffffff, {0x4, 0x0, 0x0}, []}, 0x14}, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0}, 0x0) I've reformatted it as sendmsg$nl_generic( r1, &(0x7f0000b3e000-0x38)={ addr= &(0x7f0000d4a000-0xc)={ 0x10, 0x0, 0x0, 0x0 }, addrlen=0xc, vec= &(0x7f0000007000)={ ptr= &(0x7f00001ca000)={ 0x14, 0x1c, 0x109, 0xffffffffffffffff, 0xffffffffffffffff, {0x4, 0x0, 0x0}, [] }, len= 0x14 }, vlen= 0x1, ctrl= 0x0, ctrllen=0x0, f= 0x0 }, 0x0 ) but am still getting lost - what exactly is the *byte* sequence inside the (full) message (including headers)? Ah, then again, now I see the fault injection - I guess dev_set_name() just failed and we didn't check the return value, will fix that. johannes