linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] maple_tree: Fix sparse reported issues

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: <20220713175013.aoemaelds45aavc4@revolver>
Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 17:50:20 +0000
From:   Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@...cle.com>
To:     Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
CC:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        "maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org" <maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] maple_tree: Fix sparse reported issues

* Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com> [220713 11:56]:
> On Wed, 13 Jul 2022, Liam Howlett wrote:
> > * David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> [220713 04:34]:
> > > On 12.07.22 16:24, Liam Howlett wrote:
> > > > When building with C=1, the maple tree had some rcu type mismatch &
> > > > locking mismatches in the destroy functions.  There were cosmetic only
> > > > since this happens after the nodes are removed from the tree.
> > > > 
> > > > Fixes: f8acc5e9581e (Maple Tree: add new data structure)
> > > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@...el.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Liam R. Howlett <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
> > > 
> > > Sorry to say, but the fixes become hard to follow (what/where/why). :)
> > > 
> > > I guess it's time for a new series soon. Eventually it makes sense to
> > > send the fixes as reply to the individual problematic patches. (instead
> > > of fixes to commit ids that are not upstream)
> > > 
> > > [yes, I'll do more review soon :) ]
> > 
> > I appreciate the feedback, it's much better than yelling into the void.
> > I have one more fix in the works - for __vma_adjust() of all functions
> > so that'll be impossible to follow anyways :)  I'll work on a v11 to
> > include that last one.
> 
> Please do also post the incremental for that "one more fix" once it's
> ready: I have been keeping up with what you've been posting so far,
> folding them into my debugging here, and believe we have made some but
> still not enough progress on the bugs I hit.  Folding in one more fix
> will be easy for me, advancing to v11 of a 69-part patchset will be...
> dispiriting.


Okay, thanks.  I don't think it will fix your outstanding issues but it
is necessary to fix case 6 of vma_merge() on memory allocation failure
as reported by syzbot.