linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the btrfs-kdave tree

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: <20161117132301.GA26525@lst.de>
Date:   Thu, 17 Nov 2016 14:23:01 +0100
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.cz>, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the block tree with the
        btrfs-kdave tree

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 07:49:29PM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> doesn't look correct, if bio_readpage_error() is called from the 
> ->bi_end_io() handler. bi_size is generally zeroed at that time.

At least some of these bios are magic btrfs-internal ones that never
reach the block layer.  But I don't think all are, and both the new
code and one of the old cases are broken.  David, can you drop
this one patch for now, and I'll restart the discussion on the
failfast behavior on the btrfs list?