linux-kernel - Re: [linus:master] [eventfs] 852e46e239: BUG:unable_to_handle_page_fault_for

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]

Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 11:35:18 -0800
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev, lkp@...el.com, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, 
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, 
	Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, 
	Ajay Kaher <ajay.kaher@...adcom.com>, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [linus:master] [eventfs] 852e46e239: BUG:unable_to_handle_page_fault_for_address

On Wed, 31 Jan 2024 at 07:58, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
>
> BTW, I ran my full test suite on your patches with the below updates and it
> all passed.

Those patch updates all look sane to me.

> I can break up and clean up the patches so that they are bisectable, and if
> that passes the bisectable portion of my tests, I can still send them to
> you for 6.8.

Ack. That series you posted looks fine. I didn't do any actual testing
or applying the patches, just looking at them.

The one thing I noticed is that the 'llist' removal still needs to be
done. The logical point is that "[PATCH v2 7/7]" where the
eventfs_workfn stuff is ripped out.

And the 'rcu' head should now be a union with something that is no
longer used after the last kref. The only thing that *is* used after
the last kref is the "is_freed" bit, so there's lots of choice. Using
the 'struct list_head listl' that is used for the child list would
seem to be the obvious choice, but it could be anything (including all
of the beginning of that eventfs_inode, but then you would need to
group that as another nested unnamed struct, so picking a "big enough"
entry like 'list' makes it syntactically simpler.

               Linus