Hello,
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 11:33:41PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On 08/29/2016 09:55 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > I think the right thing to do there is doing blkdev_get() /
> > blkdev_put() around func() invocation in iterate_bdevs() rather than
> > holding bd_mutex across the callback. Can
Hello,
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 11:33:41PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> On 08/29/2016 09:55 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> > I think the right thing to do there is doing blkdev_get() /
> > blkdev_put() around func() invocation in iterate_bdevs() rather than
> > holding bd_mutex across the callback. Can
On 08/29/2016 09:55 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:30:22AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
If people who are more savvy in block/fs code could ack the locking bits
I think we should apply the patch ASAP because it's an easy local DOS if
you have (open/read) access to any block
On 08/29/2016 09:55 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:30:22AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
If people who are more savvy in block/fs code could ack the locking bits
I think we should apply the patch ASAP because it's an easy local DOS if
you have (open/read) access to any block
Hello,
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 10:49:57PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> That didn't work at all. I guess bd_acquire() would just do a bdgrab()
> and not touch ->bd_holders, whereas blkdev_get() would increment
Yeah, bdev has two different refs - one for bdev struct itself and the
other for the
Hello,
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 10:49:57PM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> That didn't work at all. I guess bd_acquire() would just do a bdgrab()
> and not touch ->bd_holders, whereas blkdev_get() would increment
Yeah, bdev has two different refs - one for bdev struct itself and the
other for the
On 08/29/2016 09:55 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:30:22AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
Don't know what's the right fix, but I posted a slightly different one
for the same crash some months ago:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8556941/
Ah, I'm sorry, I didn't see
On 08/29/2016 09:55 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:30:22AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
Don't know what's the right fix, but I posted a slightly different one
for the same crash some months ago:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8556941/
Ah, I'm sorry, I didn't see
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:30:22AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> > Don't know what's the right fix, but I posted a slightly different one
> > for the same crash some months ago:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8556941/
> >
>
> Ah, I'm sorry, I didn't see that.
>
> Your patch is
Hello,
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 11:30:22AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> > Don't know what's the right fix, but I posted a slightly different one
> > for the same crash some months ago:
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/8556941/
> >
>
> Ah, I'm sorry, I didn't see that.
>
> Your patch is
On 08/27/2016 11:03 AM, Rabin Vincent wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 09:07:28AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
I got this with syzkaller:
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
Dumping ftrace buffer:
(ftrace buffer empty)
CPU: 0 PID: 11941 Comm: syz-executor Not
On 08/27/2016 11:03 AM, Rabin Vincent wrote:
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 09:07:28AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
I got this with syzkaller:
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
Dumping ftrace buffer:
(ftrace buffer empty)
CPU: 0 PID: 11941 Comm: syz-executor Not
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 09:07:28AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> I got this with syzkaller:
>
> general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
> Dumping ftrace buffer:
>(ftrace buffer empty)
> CPU: 0 PID: 11941 Comm: syz-executor Not tainted 4.8.0-rc2+ #169
>
On Sat, Aug 27, 2016 at 09:07:28AM +0200, Vegard Nossum wrote:
> I got this with syzkaller:
>
> general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
> Dumping ftrace buffer:
>(ftrace buffer empty)
> CPU: 0 PID: 11941 Comm: syz-executor Not tainted 4.8.0-rc2+ #169
>
I got this with syzkaller:
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
Dumping ftrace buffer:
(ftrace buffer empty)
CPU: 0 PID: 11941 Comm: syz-executor Not tainted 4.8.0-rc2+ #169
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS
I got this with syzkaller:
general protection fault: [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN
Dumping ftrace buffer:
(ftrace buffer empty)
CPU: 0 PID: 11941 Comm: syz-executor Not tainted 4.8.0-rc2+ #169
Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS
16 matches
Mail list logo
