[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56229FEB.2040501@oracle.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2015 15:22:19 -0400
From: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>, willy@...ux.intel.com
CC: Chuck Ebbert <cebbert.lkml@...il.com>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: fs: out of bounds on stack in iov_iter_advance
On 09/30/2015 05:30 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
> On 09/17/2015 10:24 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
>> On 08/19/2015 01:46 AM, Al Viro wrote:
>>>> or mapping->a_ops->direct_IO() returned more
>>>>> than 'count'.
>>> Was there DAX involved? ->direct_IO() in there is blkdev_direct_IO(),
>>> which takes rather different paths in those cases...
>>>
>>
>> So I've traced this all the way back to dax_io(). I can trigger this with:
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/dax.c b/fs/dax.c
>> index 93bf2f9..2cdb8a5 100644
>> --- a/fs/dax.c
>> +++ b/fs/dax.c
>> @@ -178,6 +178,7 @@ static ssize_t dax_io(struct inode *inode, struct iov_iter *iter,
>> if (need_wmb)
>> wmb_pmem();
>>
>> + WARN_ON((pos == start) && (pos - start > iov_iter_count(iter)));
>> return (pos == start) ? retval : pos - start;
>> }
>>
>> So it seems that iter gets moved twice here: once in dax_io(), and once again
>> back at generic_file_read_iter().
>>
>> I don't see how it ever worked. Am I missing something?
>
> Ping?
Ping?
Thanks,
Sasha
--
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