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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2022 02:04:50 +0000 From: HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) <naoya.horiguchi@....com> To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> CC: Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@...ux.dev>, "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>, Liu Shixin <liushixin2@...wei.com>, Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>, Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [mm-unstable PATCH v4 2/9] mm/hugetlb: separate path for hwpoison entry in copy_hugetlb_page_range() On Sun, Jul 03, 2022 at 06:42:59PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 4 Jul 2022 10:33:05 +0900 Naoya Horiguchi <naoya.horiguchi@...ux.dev> wrote: > > > Originally copy_hugetlb_page_range() handles migration entries and hwpoisoned > > entries in similar manner. But recently the related code path has more code > > for migration entries, and when is_writable_migration_entry() was converted > > to !is_readable_migration_entry(), hwpoison entries on source processes got > > to be unexpectedly updated (which is legitimate for migration entries, but > > not for hwpoison entries). This results in unexpected serious issues like > > kernel panic when forking processes with hwpoison entries in pmd. > > > > Separate the if branch into one for hwpoison entries and one for migration > > entries. > > > > ... > > > > Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 5.18 > > It's unusual to have a cc:stable patch in the middle of a series like > this. One would expect the fix to be a standalone thing against > current -linus. Ah, OK, I should've submit this seperately. > > As presented, this patch won't get into mainline until after 5.20-rc1. > If that's OK then OK. Otherwise I can shuffle things around and stage > this patch in mm-hotfixes? Yes, I'd like to ask you to do it. Thank you for the arrangement. - Naoya Horiguchi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists