linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.4 09/12] md/raid10: fix two bugs in handling of known-bad-blocks.

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: <20140126030452.668477722@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:	Sat, 25 Jan 2014 19:05:12 -0800
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Damian Nowak <spam@...aker.net>,
	NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Subject: [PATCH 3.4 09/12] md/raid10: fix two bugs in handling of known-bad-blocks.

3.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>

commit b50c259e25d9260b9108dc0c2964c26e5ecbe1c1 upstream.

If we discover a bad block when reading we split the request and
potentially read some of it from a different device.

The code path of this has two bugs in RAID10.
1/ we get a spin_lock with _irq, but unlock without _irq!!
2/ The calculation of 'sectors_handled' is wrong, as can be clearly
   seen by comparison with raid1.c

This leads to at least 2 warnings and a probable crash is a RAID10
ever had known bad blocks.

Fixes: 856e08e23762dfb92ffc68fd0a8d228f9e152160
Reported-by: Damian Nowak <spam@...aker.net>
URL: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68181
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.de>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 drivers/md/raid10.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/md/raid10.c
+++ b/drivers/md/raid10.c
@@ -1117,7 +1117,7 @@ read_again:
 			/* Could not read all from this device, so we will
 			 * need another r10_bio.
 			 */
-			sectors_handled = (r10_bio->sectors + max_sectors
+			sectors_handled = (r10_bio->sector + max_sectors
 					   - bio->bi_sector);
 			r10_bio->sectors = max_sectors;
 			spin_lock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
@@ -1125,7 +1125,7 @@ read_again:
 				bio->bi_phys_segments = 2;
 			else
 				bio->bi_phys_segments++;
-			spin_unlock(&conf->device_lock);
+			spin_unlock_irq(&conf->device_lock);
 			/* Cannot call generic_make_request directly
 			 * as that will be queued in __generic_make_request
 			 * and subsequent mempool_alloc might block


--
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/