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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2012 09:37:03 -0700 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> To: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk> Cc: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>, Tigran Mkrtchyan <tigran.mkrtchyan@...y.de> Subject: Re: [ 16/46] NFSv4.1: Remove a bogus BUG_ON() in nfs4_layoutreturn_done On Sun, Sep 16, 2012 at 05:33:03PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 16:39 -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> > > > > 3.0-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. > > > > ------------------ > > > > From: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com> > > > > commit 47fbf7976e0b7d9dcdd799e2a1baba19064d9631 upstream. > > > > Ever since commit 0a57cdac3f (NFSv4.1 send layoutreturn to fence > > disconnected data server) we've been sending layoutreturn calls > > while there is potentially still outstanding I/O to the data > > servers. The reason we do this is to avoid races between replayed > > writes to the MDS and the original writes to the DS. > > > > When this happens, the BUG_ON() in nfs4_layoutreturn_done can > > be triggered because it assumes that we would never call > > layoutreturn without knowing that all I/O to the DS is > > finished. The fix is to remove the BUG_ON() now that the > > assumptions behind the test are obsolete. > > > > Reported-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com> > > Reported-by: Tigran Mkrtchyan <tigran.mkrtchyan@...y.de> > > Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com> > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> > [...] > > The upstream commit has: > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org [>=3.5] > > and so I ignored it for 3.2. Is it actually needed for the earlier > stable series? Crud, I missed that somehow :( Trond, should I revert this in 3.0 and 3.4 stable kernels? thanks, greg k-h -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists