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, 10 Nov 2017 20:53:28 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:     NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] VFS: close race between getcwd() and d_move()

On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 03:45:41PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> -void __d_drop(struct dentry *dentry)
> +static void ___d_drop(struct dentry *dentry)
>  {
>  	if (!d_unhashed(dentry)) {
>  		struct hlist_bl_head *b;
> @@ -486,12 +488,15 @@ void __d_drop(struct dentry *dentry)
>  
>  		hlist_bl_lock(b);
>  		__hlist_bl_del(&dentry->d_hash);
> -		dentry->d_hash.pprev = NULL;
>  		hlist_bl_unlock(b);
>  		/* After this call, in-progress rcu-walk path lookup will fail. */
>  		write_seqcount_invalidate(&dentry->d_seq);
>  	}
>  }
> +void __d_drop(struct dentry *dentry) {
> +	___d_drop(dentry);
> +	dentry->d_hash.pprev = NULL;

Umm...  That reordering (unhashed vs. ->d_seq) might be a problem
on the RCU side.  I'm not sure it is, we might get away with that,
actually, but I want to finish digging through the pathwalk-related
code.  Cursing it for being too subtle for its own good, as usual...

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ