linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] please pull file-locking related changes for v3.20

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: <CA+55aFxrX8kto-4QV9ZanmWjeVrsG1A=Tf5Bh+45U7JL-nmU6w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 16 Feb 2015 10:46:36 -0800
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>
Cc:	"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
	Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] please pull file-locking related changes for v3.20

On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 6:00 AM, Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net> wrote:
>
> I'll look at it  again and also see if I can reproduce it with trinity.
> So far, I haven't been able to, but maybe I'll get lucky this time.

Can you please also remove the completely broken counters?

The f*ckers aren't even initialized, they are never used outside of
completely broken cifs code (hint: it doesn't take the spinlock, so it
just uses the counters as a random-number-generator), and even there
it would be better to just count the list instead of maintaining a
count of list entries - and doing it *wrong*.

The lock counters are broken. Get rid of them. Seriously. The reason I
care is that I tried to read the code to manage the locks in
fs/locks.c, and just passing the pointer to the counter around made it
unreadable. And when I actually tried to read it, and look at the
initialization, I see that they are never initialized.

This code is so broken that my initial reaction is "We need to just
revert the crap".

And no. The fix is *not* to just initialize those stupid things to
zero. The fix is to remove them.

                           Linus
--
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/