linux-kernel - Re: Linux 5.1-rc5

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: <20190502143110.GC17577@kroah.com>
Date:   Thu, 2 May 2019 16:31:10 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Cc:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
        linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.1-rc5

On Thu, May 02, 2019 at 04:17:58PM +0200, Martin Schwidefsky wrote:
> On Thu, 2 May 2019 14:21:28 +0200
> Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 10:19 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:  
> > > >
> > > > Can we please have the page refcount overflow fixes out on the list
> > > > for review, even if it is after the fact?  
> > > 
> > > They were actually on a list for review long before the fact, but it
> > > was the security mailing list. The issue actually got discussed back
> > > in January along with early versions of the patches, but then we
> > > dropped the ball because it just wasn't on anybody's radar and it got
> > > resurrected late March. Willy wrote a rather bigger patch-series, and
> > > review of that is what then resulted in those commits. So they may
> > > look recent, but that's just because the original patches got
> > > seriously edited down and rewritten.
> > > 
> > > That said, powerpc and s390 should at least look at maybe adding a
> > > check for the page ref in their gup paths too. Powerpc has the special
> > > gup_hugepte() case, and s390 has its own version of gup entirely. I
> > > was actually hoping the s390 guys would look at using the generic gup
> > > code.
> > > 
> > > I ruthlessly also entirely ignored MIPS, SH and sparc, since they seem
> > > largely irrelevant, partly since even theoretically this whole issue
> > > needs a _lot_ of memory.
> > > 
> > > Michael, Martin, see commit 6b3a70773630 ("Merge branch 'page-refs'
> > > (page ref overflow)"). You may or may not really care.  
> > 
> > I've now queued these patches up for the next round of stable releases,
> > as some people seem to care about these.
> > 
> > I didn't see any follow-on patches for s390 or ppc64 hit the tree for
> > these changes, am I just missing them and should also queue up a few
> > more to handle this issue on those platforms?
> 
> I fixed that with a different approach. The following two patches are
> queued for the next merge window:
> 
> d1874a0c2805 "s390/mm: make the pxd_offset functions more robust"
> 1a42010cdc26 "s390/mm: convert to the generic get_user_pages_fast code"
> 
> With these two s390 now uses the generic gup code in mm/gup.c

Nice!  Do you want me to queue those up for the stable backports once
they hit a public -rc release?

thanks,

greg k-h