linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH for-6.12 0/4] block, bfq: fix corner cases related to bfqq merging

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: <850a38fb-79dc-420e-ad85-1a0168f9e63d@kernel.dk>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 07:53:27 -0600
From: Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
To: Yu Kuai <yukuai1@...weicloud.com>, jack@...e.cz, tj@...nel.org,
 josef@...icpanda.com, paolo.valente@...more.it, mauro.andreolini@...more.it,
 avanzini.arianna@...il.com
Cc: cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yi.zhang@...wei.com, yangerkun@...wei.com,
 "yukuai (C)" <yukuai3@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-6.12 0/4] block, bfq: fix corner cases related to bfqq
 merging

On 9/3/24 7:32 PM, Yu Kuai wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 在 2024/09/03 23:51, Jens Axboe 写道:
>> On 9/2/24 7:03 AM, Yu Kuai wrote:
>>> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@...wei.com>
>>>
>>> Our syzkaller report a UAF problem(details in patch 1), however it can't
>>> be reporduced. And this set are some corner cases fix that might be
>>> related, and they are found by code review.
>>>
>>> Yu Kuai (4):
>>>    block, bfq: fix possible UAF for bfqq->bic with merge chain
>>>    block, bfq: choose the last bfqq from merge chain in
>>>      bfq_setup_cooperator()
>>>    block, bfq: don't break merge chain in bfq_split_bfqq()
>>>    block, bfq: use bfq_reassign_last_bfqq() in bfq_bfqq_move()
>>>
>>>   block/bfq-cgroup.c  |  7 +------
>>>   block/bfq-iosched.c | 17 +++++++++++------
>>>   block/bfq-iosched.h |  2 ++
>>>   3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> BFQ is effectively unmaintained, and has been for quite a while at
>> this point. I'll apply these, thanks for looking into it, but I think we
>> should move BFQ to an unmaintained state at this point.
> 
> Sorry to hear that, we would be willing to take on the responsibility of
> maintaining this code, please let me know if there are any specific
> guidelines or processes we should follow. We do have customers are using
> bfq in downstream kernels, and we are still running lots of test for
> bfq.

Most important is just reviewing fixes and tending to bug reports, and
then collecting those fixes and sending them out to the list+me for
inclusion. Not much more needs to happen, this series is a good example
of it.

-- 
Jens Axboe