[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121021162618.GB25856@kroah.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2012 09:26:18 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
Subject: Re: [ 02/37] lockd: use rpc clients cl_nodename for id encoding
On Sat, Oct 20, 2012 at 12:15:18AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 08:16:25PM -0700, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > 3.0-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
> >
> > ------------------
> >
> > From: Stanislav Kinsbursky <skinsbursky@...allels.com>
> >
> > commit 303a7ce92064c285a04c870f2dc0192fdb2968cb upstream.
> >
> > Taking hostname from uts namespace if not safe, because this cuold be
> > performind during umount operation on child reaper death. And in this case
> > current->nsproxy is NULL already.
>
> In this case (3.0.y) you haven't included the following change
> (commit cb7323fffa85 'lockd: create and use per-net NSM RPC clients on
> MON/UNMON requests') that makes lockd actually use cl_nodename. I
> think this patch alone won't fix the bug, as nsm_args::nodename can
> end up pointing to freed memory.
>
> (I also wonder whether clients should really be per-net or per UTS
> namespace, and whether those should be orthogonal namespaces at all.)
Hm, Trond, should I also include the other commit above in the next
3.0-stable release?
Or should this one be dropped?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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