linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v3] scsi: avoid potential deadloop in iscsi_if

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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <EDBAAA0BBBA2AC4E9C8B6B81DEEE1D6915E28CFE@dggeml505-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Nov 2019 12:46:44 +0000
From:   "wubo (T)" <wubo40@...wei.com>
To:     Lee Duncan <LDuncan@...e.com>,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
CC:     "cleech@...hat.com" <cleech@...hat.com>,
        "jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "open-iscsi@...glegroups.com" <open-iscsi@...glegroups.com>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ulrich Windl <Ulrich.Windl@...uni-regensburg.de>,
        Mingfangsen <mingfangsen@...wei.com>,
        "liuzhiqiang (I)" <liuzhiqiang26@...wei.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] scsi: avoid potential deadloop in iscsi_if_rx func

Hi,

> On 11/12/19 5:37 PM, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
> >
> >> In iscsi_if_rx func, after receiving one request through
> >> iscsi_if_recv_msg func, iscsi_if_send_reply will be called to try to
> >> reply the request in do-loop. If the return of iscsi_if_send_reply
> >> func return -EAGAIN all the time, one deadloop will occur.
> >>
> >> For example, a client only send msg without calling recvmsg func,
> >> then it will result in the watchdog soft lockup.
> >> The details are given as follows,
> >
> > Lee/Chris/Ulrich: Please review!
> >
> 
> 
> Okay, after looking again at the thread, I do have some additional feedback for
> the patch submitter.
> 
> You should put your "changes in V2, V3, ..." above the patch line (the
> "-- " on a line by itself), not as part of the patch.
> 
> Also, as long as you are making one last round of changes, please change
> "deadloop" to "deadlock" in your patch subject, as deadloop is not a word.
> 

Okay, I will correct it in V4.

> Lastly, the "Suggested-by" lines you added are fine, but that generally means
> that person suggested the patch, not changes. For folks that suggest changes,
> it's up to them to say they like or do not like your changes after you make them,
> at which point they can add their "Reviewed-by" tag if they wish.
> 
> Please feel free to send your patch to me directly, before publishing, if you
> would like a review before publishing again.

Okay, Thanks.
> 
> --
> Lee