linux-kernel - Re: Linux 5.6-rc2

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: <8025e1bf-4834-83c6-d12c-4e817f875776@toxicpanda.com>
Date:   Sun, 16 Feb 2020 22:02:01 -0500
From:   Josef Bacik <josef@...icpanda.com>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk>,
        Filipe Manana <fdmanana@...e.com>,
        David Sterba <dsterba@...e.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.6-rc2

On 2/16/20 9:24 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 6:08 PM Dave Jones <davej@...emonkey.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> This didn't happen in rc1, but showed up when I booted into rc2 and
>> tried to and pull some stuff with rsync.
>>
>> [   70.794783] BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at mm/slab.h:565
>> [   70.795459]  kmem_cache_alloc+0x1d3/0x290
>> [   70.795471]  alloc_extent_state+0x22/0x1c0
>> [   70.795544]  __clear_extent_bit+0x3ba/0x580
>> [   70.795569]  btrfs_truncate_inode_items+0x339/0xe50
>> [   70.795647]  btrfs_evict_inode+0x269/0x540
> 
> At a guess (just by functions involved, and the timing between rc1 and
> rc2 - no actual analysis), this is probably due to
> 
>      28553fa992cb ("Btrfs: fix race between shrinking truncate and fiemap")
> 
> which is also marked for stable, so... Filipe?
> 

I assume Filipe wrote this based on my patch here

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/josef/btrfs-next.git/commit/?id=c821555d2b9733d8f483c9e79481c7209e1c1fb0

which makes it so we can allocate safely in this context, but that patch hasn't 
made it's way to you yet.  Do you want it now?  It was prep for a much less safe 
patchset, but is fine by itself.  Thanks,

Josef