linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix sleep inside spinlock issue aka #14739

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 18 Dec 2009 15:32:40 +0530
From:	"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:	Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
	cmm@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix sleep inside spinlock issue aka #14739

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 05:15:53PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > drop i_block_reservation_lock before vfs_dq_reserve_block().
> > this patch fix http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14739
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Monakhov <dmonakhov@...nvz.org>
>   Sorry if someone already refused this (I didn't follow the previous
> discussion too closely) but: Looking at the code I see no reason why
> ext4_claim_free_blocks needs i_block_reservation_lock. In fact mballoc
> calls this function without the lock. So could not we just compute
> 'total' under the lock, release it, reserve quota and then claim free
> blocks? You'd get rid of undoing the block reservation and obtain quota
> and blocks in the usual order...

The code is protecting i_reserved_meta_blocks. We are recalculating the
the value and need to make sure we don't get the value wrong. I guess
we need to hold i_block_reservation_lock while we recalculate the
meta data block.

-aneesh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html