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, 29 Apr 2020 11:50:34 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     axboe@...nel.dk, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, bvanassche@....org,
        rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz,
        ming.lei@...hat.com, nstange@...e.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        mhocko@...e.com, yukuai3@...wei.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/6] loop: be paranoid on exit and prevent new
 additions / removals

On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 07:46:27AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> Be pedantic on removal as well and hold the mutex.
> This should prevent uses of addition while we exit.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
> ---
>  drivers/block/loop.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/block/loop.c b/drivers/block/loop.c
> index da693e6a834e..6dccba22c9b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/block/loop.c
> +++ b/drivers/block/loop.c
> @@ -2333,6 +2333,8 @@ static void __exit loop_exit(void)
>  
>  	range = max_loop ? max_loop << part_shift : 1UL << MINORBITS;
>  
> +	mutex_lock(&loop_ctl_mutex);
> +
>  	idr_for_each(&loop_index_idr, &loop_exit_cb, NULL);
>  	idr_destroy(&loop_index_idr);
>  
> @@ -2340,6 +2342,8 @@ static void __exit loop_exit(void)
>  	unregister_blkdev(LOOP_MAJOR, "loop");
>  
>  	misc_deregister(&loop_misc);
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&loop_ctl_mutex);
>  }
>  
>  module_init(loop_init);

What type of issue is this helping with?  Can it be triggered today?  if
so, shouldn't it be backported to stable kernels?

thanks,

greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ