linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix ext4_evict_inode() racing against workqueue processing code

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, 20 Mar 2013 14:42:26 +0100
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	Ext4 Developers List <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ext4: fix ext4_evict_inode() racing against workqueue
 processing code

On Wed 20-03-13 09:37:51, Ted Tso wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 02:22:23PM +0100, Jan Kara wrote:
> > > +	if (work_pending(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_unwritten_work))
> > > +		flush_work(&EXT4_I(inode)->i_unwritten_work);
> > >  }
> >   Won't it be more logical to use cancel_work_sync() here?
> 
> Hmm.... yes, probably, but then ext4_ioend_wait() can only be safely
> used by ext4_evict_inode().  I'll make the change, but I'll also make
> a comment to this effect.  (No one else is using it now, but if there
> was ever a need to use it while the inode was in use, using
> cancel_work_sync() would be highly dagernous/racy.  That being said, I
> can't really think of a good use case other than evict_inode path, so
> it seems fine to make this change.)
  Yeah, we can possibly rename the function or maybe even just inline it in
ext4_evict_inode?

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
SUSE Labs, CR
--
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