linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070601174806.GC8398@cvg>
Date:	Fri, 1 Jun 2007 21:48:06 +0400
From:	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>
To:	Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...deen.net>
Cc:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix possible leakage of blocks in UDF

[Eric Sandeen - Fri, Jun 01, 2007 at 12:17:53PM -0500]
| Andrew Morton wrote:
| 
| >Recursive lock_kernel() is OK.
| 
| Oh, it is?  Clearly I am not well versed in the BKL... that's probably a 
| good thing.... :)
| 
| Ok, let me look into it further.  I changed lock_kernel to 
| udf_lock_kernel to complain & backtrace if we re-lock, and it always 
| immediately hung after that; I assumed that was it.  I'll investigate 
| further.
| 
| -Eric
| 

Btw, Andrew is there any way to force kernel to use special UDF module
instead of compiled-in one? (Sorry for stupid question ;)

		Cyrill

-
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/