linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cifs: fix sb->s_maxbytes so that it casts properly to a signed value

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1248225314.2516.22.camel@tupile.poochiereds.net>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:15:14 -0400
From:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>
To:	Steve French <smfrench@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-cifs-client@...ts.samba.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cifs: fix sb->s_maxbytes so that it casts properly to
 a signed value

On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 19:45 -0500, Steve French wrote:
> Fix seems logical, although would like to see the maxbytes field the
> correct size.  If it really is a loff_t rather than unsigned why
> wasn't sparse warning on the vfs in sendfile when it did this
> incorrect cast?
> 

*shrug* -- maybe sparse does throw a warning, I haven't checked. It's
also not necessarily an incorrect cast I guess -- depends on whether
it's just set too large.

I think we should consider changing s_maxbytes to loff_t, but I need to
have a closer look and make sure it wouldn't break anything. There are
also other fs's that probably need similar fixes.

> When did this start breaking, am a little surprised that connectathon
> (and the usual dbench, fsstress, fsx etc.) didn't break if sendfile
> was broken, and I don't think that cifs has changed in this area in a
> long time.
> 

This has been broken for a long, long time (at least a couple of years).
Most of the reports that I have are people complaining that web serving
using apache from CIFS shares doesn't work right. I think apache uses
multiple sendfile calls per file, and bails out when it gets an error on
the first call.

> Shouldn't this cc stable ... sendfile is important.
> 

No objection to -stable if everyone thinks it's important enough.

-- 
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...hat.com>

--
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/