On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 at 04:46, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>
> Do bind neither static calls nor trusted_key_exit() before a successful
> init, in order to maintain a consistent state. In addition, depart the
> init_trusted() in the case of a real error (i.e. getting back something
> else than -ENODEV).
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023 at 00:35, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 11:28 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 at 22:18, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > >
> > > Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __init and
> > > __exit functions. Especially the static call
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 23:59, Linus Torvalds
wrote:
>
> On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 at 22:18, Sumit Garg wrote:
> >
> > Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __init and
> > __exit functions. Especially the static call from cleanup_trusted() led
> > to a crash on x86 kernel with CONFIG
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 08:14:15PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 19:41, Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 05:55:04PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:34:45PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 15:17, Amir Goldstein
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 09:28:41PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > with making vm_user_file() do this:
> > file = vma->vm_file;
> > if (file && unlikely(file->f_mode & FMODE_BACKING))
> > file = backing_file(file)->user_file;
> > return file;
> >
> > Voila.
Do bind neither static calls nor trusted_key_exit() before a successful
init, in order to maintain a consistent state. In addition, depart the
init_trusted() in the case of a real error (i.e. getting back something
else than -ENODEV).
Reported-by: Linus Torvalds
Closes:
https://lore.kernel.org/l
On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 22:05 +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 11:28 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 at 22:18, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > >
> > > Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __init and
> > > __exit functions. Especially the static c
On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 11:28 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 at 22:18, Sumit Garg wrote:
> >
> > Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __init and
> > __exit functions. Especially the static call from cleanup_trusted() led
> > to a crash on x86 kernel with CON
On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 at 22:18, Sumit Garg wrote:
>
> Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __init and
> __exit functions. Especially the static call from cleanup_trusted() led
> to a crash on x86 kernel with CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y.
>
> However, the usage of static call invocatio
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 9:21 PM Al Viro wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 08:57:21PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 8:41 PM Al Viro wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 05:55:04PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:34:45PM +0200, Miklos Szere
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 08:57:21PM +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 8:41 PM Al Viro wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 05:55:04PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:34:45PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 15:17, Amir Goldste
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 19:41, Al Viro wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 05:55:04PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:34:45PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 15:17, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sorry, you asked about ovl mount.
> > > > To me it
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 8:41 PM Al Viro wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 05:55:04PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:34:45PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 15:17, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> > >
> > > > Sorry, you asked about ovl mount.
> > > > To me i
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 05:55:04PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:34:45PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 15:17, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry, you asked about ovl mount.
> > > To me it makes sense that if users observe ovl paths in writable map
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 03:34:45PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 15:17, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>
> > Sorry, you asked about ovl mount.
> > To me it makes sense that if users observe ovl paths in writable mapped
> > memory, that ovl should not be remounted RO.
> > Anyway, I
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 4:34 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 15:17, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>
> > Sorry, you asked about ovl mount.
> > To me it makes sense that if users observe ovl paths in writable mapped
> > memory, that ovl should not be remounted RO.
> > Anyway, I don't se
On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 16:19 +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> Hello Jarkko,
>
> On 10.10.23 15:49, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 18:44 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > > On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 18:03, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 10:48 +0530, Sumit Garg w
Hello Jarkko,
On 10.10.23 15:49, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 18:44 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
>> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 18:03, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 10:48 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __ini
On Tue, 2023-10-10 at 18:44 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 18:03, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 10:48 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > > Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __init and
> > > __exit functions. Especially the static call f
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 15:17, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> Sorry, you asked about ovl mount.
> To me it makes sense that if users observe ovl paths in writable mapped
> memory, that ovl should not be remounted RO.
> Anyway, I don't see a good reason to allow remount RO for ovl in that case.
> Is there
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 4:10 PM Amir Goldstein wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 2:59 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 at 17:37, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> >
> > > static inline void put_file_access(struct file *file)
> > > diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c
> > > index fe63e23
On Tue, 10 Oct 2023 at 18:03, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 10:48 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __init and
> > __exit functions. Especially the static call from cleanup_trusted() led
> > to a crash on x86 kernel with CONF
On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 2:59 PM Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>
> On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 at 17:37, Amir Goldstein wrote:
>
> > static inline void put_file_access(struct file *file)
> > diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c
> > index fe63e236da22..02dc608d40d8 100644
> > --- a/fs/open.c
> > +++ b/fs/open.c
> >
On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 16:42 -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> Use preferred i2c_get_match_data() instead of of_match_device() to
> get the driver match data. With this, adjust the includes to explicitly
> include the correct headers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring
Perhaps self-evident but to have a cl
On Fri, 2023-10-06 at 10:48 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> Static calls invocations aren't well supported from module __init and
> __exit functions. Especially the static call from cleanup_trusted() led
> to a crash on x86 kernel with CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y.
>
> However, the usage of static call invoc
On Mon, 9 Oct 2023 at 17:37, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> static inline void put_file_access(struct file *file)
> diff --git a/fs/open.c b/fs/open.c
> index fe63e236da22..02dc608d40d8 100644
> --- a/fs/open.c
> +++ b/fs/open.c
> @@ -881,7 +881,7 @@ static inline int file_get_write_access(struct file
On Mon, 09 Oct 2023 18:37:09 +0300, Amir Goldstein wrote:
> Following v3 addresses Al's review comments on v2.
>
Applied to the vfs.misc branch of the vfs/vfs.git tree.
Patches in the vfs.misc branch should appear in linux-next soon.
Please report any outstanding bugs that were missed during rev
On Mon, 02 Oct 2023 08:57:33 -0400, Stefan Berger wrote:
> When vfs_getattr_nosec() calls a filesystem's getattr interface function
> then the 'nosec' should propagate into this function so that
> vfs_getattr_nosec() can again be called from the filesystem's gettattr
> rather than vfs_getattr(). Th
28 matches
Mail list logo
