linux-ext4 - Re: ext4_da_update_reserve_space warning fix not in stable

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]

Message-ID: <20150108074856.GA14705@quack.suse.cz>
Date:	Thu, 8 Jan 2015 08:48:56 +0100
From:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
To:	Josh Hunt <johunt@...mai.com>
Cc:	Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
	"linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org>,
	"tytso@....edu" <tytso@....edu>,
	"adilger.kernel@...ger.ca" <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>
Subject: Re: ext4_da_update_reserve_space warning fix not in stable

On Wed 07-01-15 13:49:46, Josh Hunt wrote:
> On 01/07/2015 01:21 PM, Jan Kara wrote:
> >On Wed 07-01-15 12:12:59, Josh Hunt wrote:
> >>We are hitting the following warning in the field pretty frequently
> >>on the latest 3.10 stable kernel:
> >>[11708.763067] WARNING: at fs/ext4/inode.c:363
> >>ext4_da_update_reserve_space+0x261/0x280 [ext4]()
> >>
> >>The issue was resolved via "ext4: fix warning in
> >>ext4_da_update_reserve_space()" (7d7345322d60ed), but the fix was
> >>not submitted as a stable update for 3.10. I was wondering if
> >>there's a reason why this was not done, or if it was just
> >>overlooked?
> >>
> >>The patch appears to have a dependency on "quota: provide interface
> >>for readding allocated space into reserved space" (1c8924eb106c1ac),
> >>so I think both would need to be submitted if you feel it's
> >>possible.
> >   Since the problem is relatively harmless, I think we didn't bother
> >porting it to 3.10. Feel free to port those two patches to 3.10 and submit
> >them to stable@...r.kernel.org.
> 
> Thanks for the reply Jan.
> 
> I've ported them locally to 3.10 and they seem to apply cleanly
> as-is. I can submit the request to stable as long as you believe
> there's no harm in doing so, or any other dependency which may be
> required. My testing of a patched 3.10 with the two above patches
> shows the warning no longer triggers as you report in your commit
> log.
  I'm not aware of any reason why these patches shouldn't be in 3.10 stable
so just go ahead. Thanks!

								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