linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fuse: require /dev/fuse reads to have enough buffer capacity (take 2)

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]

Date:   Wed, 12 Jun 2019 18:28:17 +0200
From:   Sander Eikelenboom <linux@...elenboom.it>
To:     Kirill Smelkov <kirr@...edi.com>
Cc:     Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@...hat.com>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>, gluster-devel@...ster.org,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fuse: require /dev/fuse reads to have enough buffer
 capacity (take 2)

On 12/06/2019 16:12, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 03:03:49PM +0200, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>> On 12/06/2019 13:25, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 09:44:49AM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 10:28 PM Kirill Smelkov <kirr@...edi.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Miklos, would 4K -> `sizeof(fuse_in_header) + sizeof(fuse_write_in)` for
>>>>> header room change be accepted?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, next cycle.   For 4.2 I'll just push the revert.
>>>
>>> Thanks Miklos. Please consider queuing the following patch for 5.3.
>>> Sander, could you please confirm that glusterfs is not broken with this
>>> version of the check?
>>>
>>> Thanks beforehand,
>>> Kirill
>>
>>
>> Hmm unfortunately it doesn't build, see below.
>> [...]
>> fs/fuse/dev.c:1336:14: error: ‘fuse_in_header’ undeclared (first use in this function)
>>        sizeof(fuse_in_header) + sizeof(fuse_write_in) + fc->max_write))
> 
> Sorry, my bad, it was missing "struct" before fuse_in_header. I
> originally compile-tested the patch with `make -j4`, was distracted onto
> other topic and did not see the error after returning due to long tail
> of successful CC lines. Apologize for the inconvenience. Below is a
> fixed patch that was both compile-tested and runtime-tested with my FUSE
> workloads (non-glusterfs).
> 
> Kirill
> 

Just tested and it works for me, thanks !

--
Sander