linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: don't optimize for non-cloned bio in bio_get_last

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56E4EA98.7090304@kernel.dk>
Date:	Sat, 12 Mar 2016 21:20:40 -0700
From:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To:	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-block@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Sagi Grimberg <sagig@....mellanox.co.il>,
	Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@...il.com>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: don't optimize for non-cloned bio in
 bio_get_last_bvec()

On 03/12/2016 08:58 PM, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 03/12/2016 07:56 AM, Ming Lei wrote:
>> For !BIO_CLONED bio, we can use .bi_vcnt safely, but it
>> doesn't mean we can just simply return .bi_io_vec[.bi_vcnt - 1]
>> because the start postion may have been moved in the middle of
>> the bvec, such as splitting in the middle of bvec.
>
> Added and tested.

And Ming, let's not get a repeat of this situation. For critical fixes, 
it has to be spot on for post -rc1, especially for code that is 
notoriously difficult to get right. Fixes are obviously fine, but it has 
to be just enough to fix the regression, no more. This has been too lax, 
I expect this to improve.

-- 
Jens Axboe