On 21-02-20 18:38:36, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 1:57 PM Ben Widawsky <ben.widaw...@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > When submitting a command for userspace, input and output payload bounce
> > buffers are allocated. For a given command, both input and output
> > buffers may exist and so when allocation of the input buffer fails, the
> > output buffer must be freed. As far as I can tell, userspace can't
> > easily exploit the leak to OOM a machine unless the machine was already
> > near OOM state.
> >
> > This bug was introduced in v5 of the patch and did not exist in prior
> > revisions.
> >
>
> Thanks for the quick turnaround, but I think that speed introduced
> some issues...
>
> > While here, adjust the variable 'j' found in patch review by Konrad.
>
> Please split this pure cleanup to its own patch. The subject says
> "Fixes", but it's only the one fix.
>
This was intentional. I pinged you internally to just drop it if you don't like
to combine these kind of things. It didn't feel worthwhile to introduce a new
patch to change the 'j'. I agree with Konrad that 'j' is not the best variable
name to use. Konrad, maybe you'd like to send a fixup for that one?
I will drop this hunk.
> >
> > Cc: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
> > Reported-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.w...@oracle.com>
>
> Since the commit is upstream add a "Fixes" line:
>
> Fixes: 583fa5e71cae ('cxl/mem: Add basic IOCTL interface")
>
> > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widaw...@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com> (v2)
> > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.came...@huawei.com>
>
> Jonathan and I didn't pre-review this.
My bad on this. It was a mistake that I pulled the info from the original patch
I was fixing.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
To unsubscribe send an email to linux-nvdimm-le...@lists.01.org
