linux-kernel - Re: nfsd changes for 2.6.37

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: <20101027083924.GA28129@infradead.org>
Date:	Wed, 27 Oct 2010 04:39:24 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Bryan Schumaker <bjschuma@...app.com>,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: nfsd changes for 2.6.37

> If you don't hold lock_flocks throughout fcntl_setlease, the flp variable
> points to a flock that may get modified by another thread and you call
> time_out_leases() without holding lock_flocks, which it requires.
> 
> The two alternatives I can see are to either use GFP_ATOMIC or to
> take the lock inside of generic_setlease and drop it outside.
> Neither of the two sounds particularly appealing.


Do locks_alloc_lock and initialization of the heap struct file_lock
in the caller.  This also avoids an entirely useless copy of the
lock structure.  free the passed in structure if we are modifying
an existing lock structure.

--
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/