linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] mm/damon/ops-common: atomically test and clear young on ptes and pmds

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 2 Jun 2023 11:35:39 -0600
From:   Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
To:     Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        SeongJae Park <sj@...nel.org>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
        Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, damon@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] mm/damon/ops-common: atomically test and clear
 young on ptes and pmds

On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 11:14 AM Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com> wrote:
>
> On 02/06/2023 17:35, Yu Zhao wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 3:30 AM Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com> wrote:
> >>
> >> It is racy to non-atomically read a pte, then clear the young bit, then
> >> write it back as this could discard dirty information. Further, it is
> >> bad practice to directly set a pte entry within a table. Instead
> >> clearing young must go through the arch-provided helper,
> >> ptep_test_and_clear_young() to ensure it is modified atomically and to
> >> give the arch code visibility and allow it to check (and potentially
> >> modify) the operation.
> >>
> >> Fixes: 3f49584b262c ("mm/damon: implement primitives for the virtual memory address spaces").
> >
> > Just to double check: was "Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org" overlooked or
> > deemed unnecessary?
>
> It was overlooked - incompetance strikes again! I was intending to cc the whole
> series. What's the best way to fix this? Can I just add stable in cc on reply to
> the cover letter or will I have to resend the lot?

Resending the whole series would be more reliable for the process (and
easier for Andrew). You might want to include a few new
reviewed/acked-bys anyway (I just acked the next patch).