On Thu 23-11-17 14:47:35, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:52:47PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > @@ -503,12 +504,18 @@ struct super_block *sget_userns(struct
> > file_system_type *type,
> > s = alloc_super(type, (flags & ~SB_SUBMOUNT), user_ns);
> > if (!s)
> >
On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:52:47PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> @@ -503,12 +504,18 @@ struct super_block *sget_userns(struct file_system_type
> *type,
> s = alloc_super(type, (flags & ~SB_SUBMOUNT), user_ns);
> if (!s)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
>
Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 23-11-17 22:57:06, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> > Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > @@ -260,9 +261,8 @@ static struct super_block *alloc_super(struct
> > > > file_system_type *type, int flags,
> > > > s->s_shrink.count_objects = super_cache_count;
> > > > s->s_shrin
On Thu 23-11-17 22:57:06, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > @@ -260,9 +261,8 @@ static struct super_block *alloc_super(struct
> > > file_system_type *type, int flags,
> > > s->s_shrink.count_objects = super_cache_count;
> > > s->s_shrink.batch = 1024;
> > > s->s_shrink.flags =
Michal Hocko wrote:
> > @@ -260,9 +261,8 @@ static struct super_block *alloc_super(struct
> > file_system_type *type, int flags,
> > s->s_shrink.count_objects = super_cache_count;
> > s->s_shrink.batch = 1024;
> > s->s_shrink.flags = SHRINKER_NUMA_AWARE | SHRINKER_MEMCG_AWARE;
> > -
On Thu 23-11-17 22:35:34, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> Jan Kara wrote:
> > Looks good to me now. You can add:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Jan Kara
> >
>
> It does not look good to me, for "goto fail" can call
> destroy_unused_super() before s->s_shrink.list is initialized.
> Also, the comment block saying "t
Jan Kara wrote:
> Looks good to me now. You can add:
>
> Reviewed-by: Jan Kara
>
It does not look good to me, for "goto fail" can call
destroy_unused_super() before s->s_shrink.list is initialized.
Also, the comment block saying "this object isn't exposed yet"
wants to be updated?
---
fs/supe
c5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Michal Hocko
> Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 12:28:35 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] fs: handle shrinker registration failure in sget_userns
>
> Syzbot has reported NULL ptr dereference during mntput because of
> sb shrinker being NULL
> CPU: 1 PID:
+0100
Subject: [PATCH] fs: handle shrinker registration failure in sget_userns
Syzbot has reported NULL ptr dereference during mntput because of
sb shrinker being NULL
CPU: 1 PID: 13231 Comm: syz-executor1 Not tainted 4.14.0-rc8+ #82
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine
;t use RCU to access
> the superblock, we are fine. But still comment before
> destroy_unused_super() should be probably updated.
Right. Thanks a lot for the review Jan!
What about the following?
---
>From cffea62e7f8605c370c8115afae530a1831e75f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Michal Hocko
On Thu 23-11-17 12:52:47, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko
>
> Syzbot has reported NULL ptr dereference during mntput because of
> sb shrinker being NULL
> CPU: 1 PID: 13231 Comm: syz-executor1 Not tainted 4.14.0-rc8+ #82
> Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine
From: Michal Hocko
Syzbot has reported NULL ptr dereference during mntput because of
sb shrinker being NULL
CPU: 1 PID: 13231 Comm: syz-executor1 Not tainted 4.14.0-rc8+ #82
Hardware name: Google Google Compute Engine/Google Compute Engine, BIOS
Google 01/01/2011
task: 8801d1dbe5c0 task.stack
12 matches
Mail list logo
