linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Was: deferring _

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: <1341193591.2249.3.camel@falcor>
Date:	Sun, 01 Jul 2012 21:46:31 -0400
From:	Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	". James Morris" <jmorris@...ei.org>,
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Was: deferring __fput()

On Sun, 2012-07-01 at 21:57 +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 01, 2012 at 03:50:02PM -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
> > Replacing it with a call to __fput(), the system boots.
> 
> "it" being just the part under that if (unlikely(...)))?  Very interesting...  If so, we
> have some kernel thread ending up with delayed __fput() which somehow makes dracut (assuimg
> you are using fedora initramfs to go with fedora config) unhappy.  With your own patch,
> doing async __fput() in a lot of cases when this one doesn't delay past the return to
> userland managing to survive the boot...  I wonder which files end up triggering that fun
> and which kernel thread is responsible...  Could you slap a printk() in there, showing
> file->f_dentry->d_inode->i_mode (octal) and at least file->f_dentry->d_name.name?
> Along with the current->comm[], all under that inner if ().  And see which ones end up
> going that way by the time execve() of /sbin/init fails.

pid=1 uid=0 d_name=init comm=swapper/0 dev="rootfs" mode=100775
pid=1 uid=0 d_name=bash comm=swapper/0 dev="rootfs" mode=100755

> It would be nice to see which sys_mount() calls are made and which (if any) fail, BTW.
> I wonder if it even gets to mounting the right root...


--
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/