linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] vfs: Use dlock list for SB's s

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: <cac4bb99-3d36-f37b-c896-aa0394f7a3c4@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Oct 2017 16:19:14 -0400
From:   Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
To:     Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>
Cc:     Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
        "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
        Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/6] vfs: Use dlock list for SB's s_inodes list

On 10/26/2017 08:58 PM, Boqun Feng wrote:
>> Is there other objections about merging this patch series? With the
>> additional patches 8 & 9 that I sent out on Oct 17, I think I had
>> addressed all the concerns that I received so far. Please let me know
>> what else do I need to do to make these patches mergeable?
>>
> Hi Waiman,
>
> Have you read my email about the dlist_for_each_entry_safe():
>
> 	https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=150831690725964&w=2
>
> ?
>
> Regards,
> Boqun

I am sorry that I somehow forgot to respond to this email. Anyway,
dlist_for_each_entry_safe() is not currently used and so was not that
well-tested. I just sent out another patch to fix that use-after-unlock
problem that you had found. The fix is somewhat different from what you
proposed, but that should still fix the problem. I modified some
dlist_for_each_entry() macros to dlist_for_each_entry_safe(), compiled
and boot the kernel. I haven't seen any problem so far.

Cheers,
Longman