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 594D1C61DA3 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 06:40:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233039AbjBUGkA (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 01:40:00 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48062 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229643AbjBUGkA (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 01:40:00 -0500 Received: from dggsgout11.his.huawei.com (dggsgout11.his.huawei.com [45.249.212.51]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9FBDE2367B for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2023 22:39:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail02.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.67.143]) by dggsgout11.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4PLV5P0mLXz4f3wtW for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 14:39:53 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.176.73] (unknown [10.174.176.73]) by APP3 (Coremail) with SMTP id _Ch0CgA35CE3Z_RjQLS5Dg--.51190S3; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 14:39:53 +0800 (CST) Subject: Re: [GIT PULL for-6.3] Block updates for 6.3 To: Linus Torvalds , Jens Axboe , Jan Kara , Paolo Valente Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "yukuai (C)" References: <5afa0795-775d-f710-7989-4c8e1cd7b56f@kernel.dk> From: Yu Kuai Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 14:39:51 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CM-TRANSID: _Ch0CgA35CE3Z_RjQLS5Dg--.51190S3 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvJXoW7Aw15JF1fXw1rtw43uw43GFg_yoW8CrWrp3 W5KFs0krs7GrZ3Jry8Aw12q3WSyFyftryrAas0grn8AF95Ww17JF90kw4Y9F9a93yrCr1S vF95GrZ5C34DZF7anT9S1TB71UUUUUUqnTZGkaVYY2UrUUUUjbIjqfuFe4nvWSU5nxnvy2 9KBjDU0xBIdaVrnRJUUUyEb4IE77IF4wAFF20E14v26r4j6ryUM7CY07I20VC2zVCF04k2 6cxKx2IYs7xG6rWj6s0DM7CIcVAFz4kK6r1j6r18M28lY4IEw2IIxxk0rwA2F7IY1VAKz4 vEj48ve4kI8wA2z4x0Y4vE2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Ar0_tr1l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv20xvEc7Cj xVAFwI0_Gr1j6F4UJwA2z4x0Y4vEx4A2jsIE14v26rxl6s0DM28EF7xvwVC2z280aVCY1x 0267AKxVW0oVCq3wAS0I0E0xvYzxvE52x082IY62kv0487Mc02F40EFcxC0VAKzVAqx4xG 6I80ewAv7VC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUGwAv7VC2z280aVAFwI0_Jr0_Gr1lOx8S6xCaFV Cjc4AY6r1j6r4UM4x0Y48IcVAKI48JMxk0xIA0c2IEe2xFo4CEbIxvr21l42xK82IYc2Ij 64vIr41l4I8I3I0E4IkC6x0Yz7v_Jr0_Gr1lx2IqxVAqx4xG67AKxVWUJVWUGwC20s026x 8GjcxK67AKxVWUGVWUWwC2zVAF1VAY17CE14v26r126r1DMIIYrxkI7VAKI48JMIIF0xvE 2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_Jr0_JF4lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvE42 xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWrZr1j6s0DMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIE c7CjxVAFwI0_Jr0_GrUvcSsGvfC2KfnxnUUI43ZEXa7IU1zuWJUUUUU== X-CM-SenderInfo: 51xn3trlr6x35dzhxuhorxvhhfrp/ X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org Hi, 在 2023/02/21 6:52, Linus Torvalds 写道: > 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(). It's right this is wrong, I think this happened as following: 1) bfq_sync_bfqq_move() is introduced in commit 9778369a2d6c ("block, bfq: split sync bfq_queues on a per-actuator basis"), which is merged to for-6.3 branch. 2) commit 64dc8c732f5c ("block, bfq: fix possible uaf for 'bfqq->bic'") is merged to mainline. 3) later, the fix for 2) b600de2d7d3a ("block, bfq: fix uaf for bfqq in bic_set_bfqq()") is merged to mainline as well, however, I missed the change in bfq_sync_bfqq_move() in for-6.3 brach. 4) At last, 1) is merged to mainline with some rebase, this is how bfq_check_ioprio_change() is fixed, however, bfq_sync_bfqq_move() is still problematic. Thanks, Kuai > > 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. > > Linus > . >