linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull NFS client bugfixes....

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: <20100107235149.GD16076@basil.fritz.box>
Date:	Fri, 8 Jan 2010 00:51:49 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
Cc:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	torvalds@...l.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Please pull NFS client bugfixes....

> I'd like to see this fixed, but I do not want to jump onto a solution
> that changes the behaviour of mmap() w.r.t. revalidation. The current
> behaviour dates back at least to 2.3.x if not before.

So do you have a plan to fix it?

I don't think it'll be possible to do drastic changes in the
VFS for 2.6.33, and it seems preserving the current semantics
would need that.

> That's why I'm working slowly on this.

Delaying a fix to after 2.6.33 is not an option imho.

It hits everyone with LOCKDEP enabled who uses mmap over NFS.
That's new in 2.6.33, previously LOCKDEP didn't diagnose this.

I'll keep using my patch, but I suppose once we're going more
towards a release you'll get more reports of this.

-Andi
-- 
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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/