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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 10 Nov 2015 19:25:52 -0700
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
	Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
	Andrey Ryabinin <ryabinin.a.a@...il.com>,
	Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>,
	Chuck Ebbert <cebbert.lkml@...il.com>,
	linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: fs: out of bounds on stack in iov_iter_advance

On Tue, Nov 10 2015, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Al, ping?
> 
> On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:19 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> How are we going to handle that one?  I can put it into mainline pull
> >> request via vfs.git, with Cc: stable, but if e.g. Jens prefers to take it
> >> via the block tree, I'll be glad to leave it for him to deal with.
> >
> > Put it in the vfs tree (I'm hoping for a pull request soon..)
> >
> > I pulled the block trees from Jens yesterday, so there is presumably
> > nothing pending there right now.
> 
> Apparently my "hoping for a pull request soon" was ridiculously optimistic.
> 
> Al, looking at the most recent linux-next, most of the vfs commits
> there seem to be committed in the last day or two. I'm getting the
> feeling that that is all 4.5 material by now.
> 
> Should I just take the iov patch as-is, since apparently no vfs pull
> request is happening this merge cycle? And no, I'm not taking
> "developed during the second week of the merge window, and sent in the
> last few days of it". I'm done with that.

I've got 8 other patches pending for a post core merge, just waiting for
the last core pull request to go in. I haven't seen this iov iter fix,
though.



  git://git.kernel.dk/linux-block.git for-linus


----------------------------------------------------------------
Jan Kara (1):
      brd: Refuse improperly aligned discard requests

Jens Axboe (2):
      MAINTAINERS: add reference to new linux-block list
      blk-mq: mark __blk_mq_complete_request() static

Randy Dunlap (1):
      block: fix blk-core.c kernel-doc warning

Sathyavathi M (1):
      NVMe: Increase the max transfer size when mdts is 0

Stephan Günther (2):
      NVMe: use split lo_hi_{read,write}q
      NVMe: add support for Apple NVMe controller

Vivek Goyal (1):
      fs/block_dev.c: Remove WARN_ON() when inode writeback fails

 MAINTAINERS             |  1 +
 block/blk-core.c        |  3 +++
 block/blk-mq.c          |  2 +-
 block/blk-mq.h          |  1 -
 drivers/block/brd.c     |  3 +++
 drivers/nvme/host/pci.c | 15 +++++++++------
 fs/block_dev.c          | 15 ++++++++++++---
 7 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

-- 
Jens Axboe

--
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