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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:59:13 -0800 (PST) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: npiggin@...nel.dk Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch 01/28] fs: d_validate fixes From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2010 12:51:23 -0800 (PST) > From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk> > Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:09:01 +1100 > >> d_validate has been broken for a long time. >> >> kmem_ptr_validate does not guarantee that a pointer can be dereferenced >> if it can go away at any time. Even rcu_read_lock doesn't help, because >> the pointer might be queued in RCU callbacks but not executed yet. >> >> So the parent cannot be checked, nor the name hashed. The dentry pointer >> can not be touched until it can be verified under lock. Hashing simply >> cannot be used. >> >> Instead, verify the parent/child relationship by traversing parent's >> d_child list. It's slow, but only ncpfs and the destaged smbfs care >> about it, at this point. >> >> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk> > > This won't apply because is conflicts with Christoph Hellwig's > RCU conversion of d_validate(). > > Which is a change that went in more than a month ago. In fact the conflicts of your patch set are even more pervasive, since all dcache hash traversals are essentially RCU protected instead of dcache_lock protected right now. This makes it very difficult to test or analyze your patches for those of us on mainline or similar. -- 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists