linux-kernel - Re: possible deadlock in ovl

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 15:50:10 +0000
From: Weiß, Simone <Simone.Weiss@...ktrobit.com>
To: "miklos@...redi.hu" <miklos@...redi.hu>, "amir73il@...il.com"
	<amir73il@...il.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-unionfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: possible deadlock in ovl_llseek 27c1936af506

On Wed, 2024-03-13 at 15:47 +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Mar 2024 at 14:14, Amir Goldstein <amir73il@...il.com> wrote:
> 
> > The reason for this report is calling llseek() on lower ovl from
> > ovl_copy_up_data() when ovl_copy_up_data() is called with upper
> > inode lock and the lower ovl uses the same upper fs.
> > 
> > It looks to me like the possible deadlock should have been solved by commit
> > c63e56a4a652 ovl: do not open/llseek lower file with upper sb_writers held
> > that moved ovl_copy_up_data() out of the inode_lock() scope.
> 
> That commit is in v6.7, so something different must be happening on v6.8-rc1.
> 
> Simone, please send a new report for v6.8-rc1 if a lockdep splat can
> be reproduced on that kernel.
> 
> Thanks,
> Miklos

Sure, I will try to reproduce it again and send a new report if needed.

Thanks,
Simone