linux-kernel - [107/264] md/raid5: fix bug that could result in reads from a failed device.

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:	Wed, 09 Nov 2011 13:32:34 -0800
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk, NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Subject: [107/264] md/raid5: fix bug that could result in reads from a failed device.

3.1-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>

commit 355840e7a7e56bb2834fd3b0da64da5465f8aeaa upstream.

This bug was introduced in 415e72d034c50520ddb7ff79e7d1792c1306f0c9
which was in 2.6.36.

There is a small window of time between when a device fails and when
it is removed from the array.  During this time we might still read
from it, but we won't write to it - so it is possible that we could
read stale data.

We didn't need the test of 'Faulty' before because the test on
In_sync is sufficient.  Since we started allowing reads from the early
part of non-In_sync devices we need a test on Faulty too.

This is suitable for any kernel from 2.6.36 onwards, though the patch
might need a bit of tweaking in 3.0 and earlier.

Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>

---
 drivers/md/raid5.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/drivers/md/raid5.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid5.c
@@ -3069,7 +3069,7 @@ static void analyse_stripe(struct stripe
 			}
 		} else if (test_bit(In_sync, &rdev->flags))
 			set_bit(R5_Insync, &dev->flags);
-		else {
+		else if (!test_bit(Faulty, &rdev->flags)) {
 			/* in sync if before recovery_offset */
 			if (sh->sector + STRIPE_SECTORS <= rdev->recovery_offset)
 				set_bit(R5_Insync, &dev->flags);

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/