linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 2/2] rxrpc: Fix bug due to prealloc collision

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: <2687076.1752004650@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2025 20:57:30 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
    Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>,
    "David S.
 Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
    Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
    linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
    "Junvyyang,
                         Tencent Zhuque Lab" <zhuque@...cent.com>,
    Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] rxrpc: Fix bug due to prealloc collision

Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:

> On Mon,  7 Jul 2025 11:24:34 +0100 David Howells wrote:
> > +	rxrpc_prefail_call(call, RXRPC_CALL_LOCAL_ERROR, -EBADSLT);
> > +	__set_bit(RXRPC_CALL_RELEASED, &call->flags);
> 
> is the __set_bit() needed / intentional here?
> Looks like rxrpc_prefail_call() does:
> 
> 	WARN_ON_ONCE(__test_and_set_bit(RXRPC_CALL_RELEASED, &call->flags));

Actually, it shouldn't be.  I added that first, then realised that wasn't
sufficient.

I also realised there should be a third patch I failed to restack onto the git
branch.

Can you take the first patch and I'll alter this and repost this patch and add
the lost one?  Or should I just repost all three?

David