linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] Fix VMA tree modification under mmap read lock

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: <a017acde-7520-743c-963b-94a23c0f30c8@suse.cz>
Date:   Tue, 28 Mar 2023 11:10:58 +0200
From:   Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To:     "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        maple-tree@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] Fix VMA tree modification under mmap read lock

On 3/27/23 21:48, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
> * Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> [230327 15:35]:
>> On Mon, 27 Mar 2023 14:55:24 -0400 "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com> wrote:
>> 
>> > These patches have been in -next since next-20230301, and have received
>> > intensive testing in Android as part of the RCU page fault patchset.
>> > They were also sent as part of the "Per-VMA locks" v4 patch series.
>> > Patches 1 to 7 are bug fixes for RCU mode of the tree and patch 8 enables
>> > RCU mode for the tree.
>> 
>> What's happening here?  I assume you've decided that the first 8
>> patches of the "Per-VMA locks v4" series should be fast-tracked into
>> 6.3-rcX and backported?  And we retain the rest of that series for
>> 6.4-rc1?
> 
> Yes, they need to be backported and fast tracked to fix the issue syzbot
> found.

Stable usually wants the "mainline first" which means fast tracking first,
then once it's in mainline, they pick it and annotate with mainline commit id.

One question is how Linus would feel about this now for rc5.

Another question is if we should really deviate in the patch 8/8 backport
just because it's not necessary for stable. Generally they would also prefer
not to deviate, unless there's a strong reason.

>> 
>> Patch [3/8] hasn't come through to me, to linux-mm or to linux-kernel.
> 
> Should arrive shortly, I received it from one of the ML.
> 
>