linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: Fix dio_cleanup() to advance the head index

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: <ZIlc3Z8Sbgd4Vk6o@infradead.org>
Date:   Tue, 13 Jun 2023 23:23:25 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>,
        Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@...il.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev, lkp@...el.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: Fix dio_cleanup() to advance the head index

On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 10:54:39PM +0100, David Howells wrote:
> --- a/fs/direct-io.c
> +++ b/fs/direct-io.c
> @@ -459,6 +459,7 @@ static inline void dio_cleanup(struct dio *dio, struct dio_submit *sdio)
>  	if (dio->is_pinned)
>  		unpin_user_pages(dio->pages + sdio->head,
>  				 sdio->tail - sdio->head);
> +	sdio->head = sdio->tail;

So looking at the original patch, it does:

-       while (sdio->head < sdio->tail)
-               put_page(dio->pages[sdio->head++]);
+       if (dio->is_pinned)
+               unpin_user_pages(dio->pages + sdio->head,
+                                sdio->tail - sdio->head);

so yes, we're this looks correct:

Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>