linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] relay-file-read-start-pos-fix.patch

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: <1182270325.30702.87.camel@ubuntu>
Date:	Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:25:25 -0500
From:	Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>
To:	Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
Cc:	David Wilder <dwilder@...ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	systemtap@...rces.redhat.com,
	Yumiko Sugita <yumiko.sugita.yf@...achi.com>,
	Satoshi Oshima <soshima@...hat.com>,
	Hideo Aoki <haoki@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] relay-file-read-start-pos-fix.patch

On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 12:43 +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
> Hi David and Tom,
> 
> David Wilder wrote:
> > This patch fixes a bug in the relay read interface causing the number
> > of consumed bytes to be set incorrectly. 
> 
> Thank you. Your patch fixes one of my concerns.
> However there is another bug I found.
> When I use relayfs with "overwrite" mode, read() still set incorrect
> number of consumed bytes.
> I tried to fix that. Please review it.

Hi,

I haven't had a chance to test it myself yet, but it looks ok to me,
except for one problem noted below...

Thanks for fixing it.

> 
> Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>
> 
> ---
>  kernel/relay.c |    8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6.22-rc4-mm2/kernel/relay.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.22-rc4-mm2.orig/kernel/relay.c	2007-06-13 20:22:02.000000000 +0900
> +++ linux-2.6.22-rc4-mm2/kernel/relay.c	2007-06-18 23:00:54.000000000 +0900
> @@ -812,7 +812,10 @@
>  	}
> 
>  	buf->bytes_consumed += bytes_consumed;
> -	read_subbuf = read_pos / buf->chan->subbuf_size;
> +	if (!read_pos)
> +		read_subbuf = buf->subbufs_consumed;

I think this should be instead:

+		read_subbuf = buf->subbufs_consumed % n_subbufs;

Tom


> +	else
> +		read_subbuf = read_pos / buf->chan->subbuf_size;
>  	if (buf->bytes_consumed + buf->padding[read_subbuf] == subbuf_size) {
>  		if ((read_subbuf == buf->subbufs_produced % n_subbufs) &&
>  		    (buf->offset == subbuf_size))
> @@ -841,8 +844,9 @@
>  	}
> 
>  	if (unlikely(produced - consumed >= n_subbufs)) {
> -		consumed = (produced / n_subbufs) * n_subbufs;
> +		consumed = produced - n_subbufs + 1;
>  		buf->subbufs_consumed = consumed;
> +		buf->bytes_consumed = 0;
>  	}
>  	
>  	produced = (produced % n_subbufs) * subbuf_size + buf->offset;
> 
> 
> 


-
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/