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  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]
Date:   Tue, 15 Jan 2019 19:05:12 +0300
From:   Kirill Tkhai <>
To:     Miklos Szeredi <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fuse: Fix race in fuse_writepage_in_flight()

On 15.01.2019 19:03, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 4:55 PM Kirill Tkhai <> wrote:
>> On 15.01.2019 18:37, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 12:03 PM Kirill Tkhai <> wrote:
>>>> On 10.01.2019 14:00, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 11:48 AM Kirill Tkhai <> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi, Miklos,
>>>>>> any comments about this?
>>>>> Is there a reproducer?  ISTR that fsx-linux with mmaps enabled was
>>>>> good for stressing the writeback_cache code.
>>>> There is no a reproducer, since I found that by eyes during preparation of another patchset.
>>> That's good.  It would even better to have a reproducer, but it
>>> doesn't look easy...
>>> Completely redid this and reordered the patchset so this change is
>>> made before the locking changes actually introduce the bug.
>> Hm, I meant that I found this during preparation of the patchset,
>> but not that fi->lock patchset introduces the bug. I don't think
>> the patchset is involved:
>> 1)before we had race, because different locks fc->lock and fiq->waitq.lock
>> are taken in fuse_dev_read() and fuse_writepage_in_flight();
>> 2)after we have the same race, and the locks are fi->lock and fiq->waitq.lock.
> Ah, so the race was introduced earlier, when fiq->waitq.lock was split
> out from fc->lock.

Yeah, and there was another performer, not me :)

Powered by blists - more mailing lists