linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.15 000/297] 5.15.140-rc1 review

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: <81a11ebe-ea47-4e21-b5eb-536b1a723168@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 24 Nov 2023 23:45:09 -0600
From:   Daniel Díaz <daniel.diaz@...aro.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     patches@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
        linux@...ck-us.net, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
        srw@...dewatkins.net, rwarsow@....de, conor@...nel.org,
        jack@...e.cz, chrubis@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15 000/297] 5.15.140-rc1 review

Hello!

On 24/11/23 11:50 a. m., Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.15.140 release.
> There are 297 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> let me know.
> 
> Responses should be made by Sun, 26 Nov 2023 17:19:17 +0000.
> Anything received after that time might be too late.
> 
> The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
> 	https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v5.x/stable-review/patch-5.15.140-rc1.gz
> or in the git tree and branch at:
> 	git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-5.15.y
> and the diffstat can be found below.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

We are noticing a regression with ltp-syscalls' preadv03:

-----8<-----
   preadv03 preadv03
   preadv03_64 preadv03_64
   preadv03.c:102: TINFO: Using block size 512
   preadv03.c:87: TPASS: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 512 bytes successfully with content 'a' expectedly
   preadv03.c:87: TPASS: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 512 bytes successfully with content 'a' expectedly
   preadv03.c:87: TPASS: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 512 bytes successfully with content 'b' expectedly
   preadv03.c:102: TINFO: Using block size 512
   preadv03.c:77: TFAIL: Buffer wrong at 0 have 62 expected 61
   preadv03.c:77: TFAIL: Buffer wrong at 0 have 62 expected 61
   preadv03.c:66: TFAIL: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 0 bytes, expected 512
   preadv03.c:102: TINFO: Using block size 512
   preadv03.c:77: TFAIL: Buffer wrong at 0 have 62 expected 61
   preadv03.c:77: TFAIL: Buffer wrong at 0 have 62 expected 61
   preadv03.c:66: TFAIL: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 0 bytes, expected 512
   preadv03.c:102: TINFO: Using block size 512
   preadv03.c:87: TPASS: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 512 bytes successfully with content 'a' expectedly
   preadv03.c:87: TPASS: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 512 bytes successfully with content 'a' expectedly
   preadv03.c:87: TPASS: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 512 bytes successfully with content 'b' expectedly
   preadv03.c:102: TINFO: Using block size 512
   preadv03.c:77: TFAIL: Buffer wrong at 0 have 62 expected 61
   preadv03.c:77: TFAIL: Buffer wrong at 0 have 62 expected 61
   preadv03.c:66: TFAIL: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 0 bytes, expected 512
   preadv03.c:102: TINFO: Using block size 512
   preadv03.c:77: TFAIL: Buffer wrong at 0 have 62 expected 61
   preadv03.c:77: TFAIL: Buffer wrong at 0 have 62 expected 61
   preadv03.c:66: TFAIL: preadv(O_DIRECT) read 0 bytes, expected 512
----->8-----

This is seen in the following environments:
* dragonboard-845c
* juno-64k_page_size
* qemu-arm64
* qemu-armv7
* qemu-i386
* qemu-x86_64
* x86_64-clang

and on the following RC's:
* v5.10.202-rc1
* v5.15.140-rc1
* v6.1.64-rc1

(Note that the list might not be complete, because some branches failed to execute completely due to build issues reported elsewhere.)

Bisection in linux-5.15.y pointed to:

   commit db85c7fff122c14bc5755e47b51fbfafae660235
   Author: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>
   Date:   Fri Oct 13 14:13:50 2023 +0200

       ext4: properly sync file size update after O_SYNC direct IO
       
       commit 91562895f8030cb9a0470b1db49de79346a69f91 upstream.


Reverting that commit made the test pass.

Reported-by: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@...aro.org>

Greetings!

Daniel Díaz
daniel.diaz@...aro.org