linux-kernel - Re: disk revalidation updates and OOM

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: <18bbb6cd-578e-5ead-f2cd-a8a01db17e29@windriver.com>
Date:   Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:01:09 +0800
From:   He Zhe <zhe.he@...driver.com>
To:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:     jack@...e.cz, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, bvanassche@....org, keith.busch@...el.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mwilck@...e.com, yuyufen@...wei.com,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: disk revalidation updates and OOM



On 3/11/20 11:54 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 12:03:43PM +0800, He Zhe wrote:
>>>> 979c690d block: move clearing bd_invalidated into check_disk_size_change
>>>> f0b870d block: remove (__)blkdev_reread_part as an exported API
>>>> 142fe8f block: fix bdev_disk_changed for non-partitioned devices
>>>> a1548b6 block: move rescan_partitions to fs/block_dev.c
>>> Just to make sure we are on the same page:  if you revert all four it
>>> works, if you rever all but
>>>
>>> a1548b6 block: move rescan_partitions to fs/block_dev.c
>>>
>>> it doesn't?
>> After reverting 142fe8f, rescan_partitions would be called in block/ioctl.c
>> and cause a build failure. So I need to also revert a1548b6 to provide
>> rescan_partitions.
>>
>> OR if I manually add the following diff instead of reverting a1548b6, then yes,
>> it works too.
> Ok, so 142fe8f is good except for the build failure.
>
> Do 142fe8f and 979c690d work with the build fix applied? (f0b870d
> shouldn't be interesting for this case).

Sorry for slow reply.

With my build fix applied, the issue is triggered since 142fe8f.
And I can see the endless loop of invalidate and revalidate...

Zhe