From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0FBFC61DA3 for ; Wed, 22 Feb 2023 00:03:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229561AbjBVAD4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 19:03:56 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47136 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229546AbjBVAD4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 19:03:56 -0500 Received: from mail-pj1-x1030.google.com (mail-pj1-x1030.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1030]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42DF85FCA for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 16:03:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x1030.google.com with SMTP id qi12-20020a17090b274c00b002341621377cso6648840pjb.2 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 16:03:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel-dk.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=drterpwutcAES3ZpeSgqLGpByTH2KXtwJq1zap9gSZE=; b=KZZR+/QUj04bDCloEwHY0HJU+ftyNN78uklpuZS+KgfcANpo3nbH9g8vfjs+v8oJ3M IkgOxd++JGlfko3u/VFXFC9vffpLJRv7XA2/dnh2QTAC+kkZdtdTfLRuM/HdjBww40gU fvYcA0aWyGOYb+xcoI5AnN0g2fRzziS/4Vjq6CICN995EO2GK4bvaE5SdPA17ObIJaCp rftFN++xnWA8HdtWAfEzPkOF3gDjPApYAz3P3xaqpNz8BaeOYOFGlTLColhoQ0bzfSfG wnQmxynTU5o1dSiHjNrXDF6S+nj4qd196zwZA+qeR8BXTmsMLLxnHNaBTzRbdUf/uk9r 35fw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=drterpwutcAES3ZpeSgqLGpByTH2KXtwJq1zap9gSZE=; b=1LSEWt5v6/PK7At7SbpJKRhnIR3VkOG43kmKsJ6K02pI+9skKYXOwBNDrlyT/aUZOH CEaNjMK1nU/u3nk+ozMgpxsnOQUPGboXG2XblA60cBVsf3EDv6rfzYWzo3p2kZHEsSGF noorBdy0FmUAM5EzQd9h+TnwVdpyuEDEOd4GdST1ayNuOsfPGcykZZmKvAkYYApZIK/G AV8rkBj1tmgumPH1RnIe10Ai2Pf1uxLMneE2oM5xPZgYM5vcll5efB/HurvuV85EF8OR zDaYlV4u7KiEVLZFJ3uLG9yVJ5yfpDd2sU8wDRq81d+Knd+QhJooGX9SvPIgXDWvAE1K gw5A== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKWUEZgPJw0CbY5x98Twy+ZkndEGF5buf0lA/edU9njM6TeLAPgZ 8oEM3Xq/9AFMUj//o5GlypdjGeNbpqgTUOxc X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8hLpQ2EySGAeZWIt0Jur7XA6/sEfqBxRLAFUMDsFKk4skjdCSxBhgBCIURC+S1cU7xLHecsQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:ecce:b0:19a:af51:c282 with SMTP id a14-20020a170902ecce00b0019aaf51c282mr7135995plh.0.1677024231637; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 16:03:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.136] ([198.8.77.157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p18-20020a170902b09200b0019a97faf636sm10428154plr.83.2023.02.21.16.03.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 16:03:50 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9a048f21-1938-084d-b328-8a345bd20263@kernel.dk> Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 17:03:49 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.7.2 Subject: Re: [GIT PULL for-6.3] Block updates for 6.3 Content-Language: en-US To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , Paolo Valente References: <5afa0795-775d-f710-7989-4c8e1cd7b56f@kernel.dk> From: Jens Axboe In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org On 2/20/23 3:52 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 6:54 PM Jens Axboe wrote: >> >> I've pushed a merged branch here: >> >> https://git.kernel.dk/cgit/linux-block/log/?h=for-6.3/block-merged > > Hmm. I do verify against suggested merges after doing my own (even > when your suggested merge was then made stale by another later > addition), and I think your merge was wrong wrt bfq_sync_bfqq_move(), > which in your version does the bfq_release_process_ref() before doing > the bic_set_bfqq(). > > IOW, I think your merge essentially dropped one of the fixes in commit > b600de2d7d3a ("block, bfq: fix uaf for bfqq in bic_set_bfqq()"). > > Maybe there were reasons why that ordering wasn't required any more, > but it looks funky (and you appear to have correctly merged the other > case in bfq_check_ioprio_change()). > > Anyway, this is just a nit-picky email saying that I'm pretty sure > I've done the merge right, but since it doesn't match what you did, I > thought I'd mention it. > > Worth double-checking this, in other words. I realize you're mostly > afk this week, so whenever you're back. I'll double check it. The merge doesn't end up touching any of bfq_sync_bfqq_move(), just conflicting with: bfq_check_ioprio_change(), where the release ordering should be upheld, and __bfq_bic_change_cgroup(), where it's still done after assigning the async_bfqq. I'll double check tomorrow... -- Jens Axboe