linux-ext4 - Re: [PATCH 03/11] mm: Protect operations adding pages to page cache with invalidate

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, 12 May 2021 15:20:44 +0100
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>, ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org,
        Chao Yu <yuchao0@...wei.com>,
        Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@....com>,
        "Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@...cle.com>,
        Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        Johannes Thumshirn <jth@...nel.org>,
        linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-f2fs-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>, Ted Tso <tytso@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] mm: Protect operations adding pages to page cache
 with invalidate_lock

On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 03:46:11PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:

> diff --git a/mm/truncate.c b/mm/truncate.c
> index 57a618c4a0d6..93bde2741e0e 100644
> --- a/mm/truncate.c
> +++ b/mm/truncate.c
> @@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(truncate_inode_pages_range);
>   * @mapping: mapping to truncate
>   * @lstart: offset from which to truncate
>   *
> - * Called under (and serialised by) inode->i_rwsem.
> + * Called under (and serialised by) inode->i_rwsem and inode->i_mapping_rwsem.

mapping->invalidate_lock, surely?  And could we ask lockdep to assert
this for us instead of just a comment?

>   *
>   * Note: When this function returns, there can be a page in the process of
>   * deletion (inside __delete_from_page_cache()) in the specified range.  Thus
> -- 
> 2.26.2
> 
>