From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pj1-f43.google.com (mail-pj1-f43.google.com [209.85.216.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59A8D403138 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2026 08:47:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.43 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783500444; cv=none; b=a/3jjWKmrlwyll7gB5kuPSTbtHDiPHNz9fxwA2lm1dzY8m3YH/6m6+fY5CwN2CAmOvth2/Y6I/t1EVA92HY0j3quRzPt5Sq1OXPicYN9zVTafUW4Gc+OfKf1XXKcVmefnjiIvCsJ7CYaa7JToIDMeHZ+njqOxVPLsI6Zih0gEy8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783500444; c=relaxed/simple; bh=JFYJwNlUeDpI30EK0lLd4/qcoBnLBogsGxkiN8Nw4iI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=LdaLGOHci7OtVXh7EhoyDpCUwMDHLMW/Y75GEtc9K4gsnlUD+2GhErfiUQpmDE/GrdWufhTdkOAVUdz7/0wSArRDnEP2TC1JgMSXIULP3yxeOInvvfwmXV3ml0BnUZw0dphSio+Ha47J6o0IEsI4YSs1AePbujt004BNF5XDUJQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=Aw4rhBij; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.216.43 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Aw4rhBij" Received: by mail-pj1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-37e0a189b0bso355218a91.1 for ; Wed, 08 Jul 2026 01:47:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1783500443; x=1784105243; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=aHSKy3h5lLOjkvRp4gtYQf76cY5cLHkTNVDBkUf0G/I=; b=Aw4rhBij/TBaumgS2Ho0Si0TKIgfih2TfmbZru33h23K26zV34r5EKscwgniktER0Y pyag8ZRFprIq9N6cCXhQMh4a0jn9LaI2niEJmxbVkqg1HTxmHtLrWP2UEQNp+EtpW8/j s6ol9Ffbi/kI8clwHWvHVpH5QUYVY2GjUVKY60qfxaQ6/uJm9HQS1B7UgQ5i6u9O9eYT gMcvG1FyGZgRoe7233cZLnLo3eOz6uxWxkDsooe0qMo5gmVeZIoHSMPCCLXIDSU5fw0w B5LICC9iJfjc4aD0JJgsFPtXtVwIN9fdFuVHkfNz43pLQpyvU7pjwNiC5PzklYn+5XXT jpqA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1783500443; x=1784105243; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from :to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=aHSKy3h5lLOjkvRp4gtYQf76cY5cLHkTNVDBkUf0G/I=; b=mhwW7giuF8C1hdncClIE2v+Z273wB/a57nIfseXZQDF10yeE8nZycMndaZ8VI9T+7T Vh3Q7KlbKW7CBKeyZl2vakIET6zI9wlG/LuddxmtRVtT5mvd2c31eLWaM1+iuDiRd6rH XOKJEHbHiMYoHdvvUMD1WAFLW6tsUGVXajP92EQVW0y3C4CBNBQUb3oLu/ozR66eVpcJ IGHu12xEtm8psHHeN6mi+EhL1Fqss6xOxjherM+Rd7Cfg0XNEy8QO5ZCklT8pLNbPTV8 32QCzKWZznuNrdeylUeHWUA9vwK/YP+rrKrBOJIZv/hmfaAAkdqZ5Ep0CQVQHpa2c4jy AtIQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AHgh+RoMfWVvl/swPABo8l7tro1UencxvNYLPqB+yn9zGd4p9Z+gOhKQAXh0GfO38Ax2vgY/RJikD/OoWCes6Ww=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzTyu4TbIjgZkNpYEv+Z1QhWXZfI6Dmf1qmvkk8WnJRhotFUuMD MCbRGb0VEyICvRGYz8UuH68CEMGVi8OrPv1KSQfE2MuUZ1DyH2Vrt6oL X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7cltiHxfocmQNQ6WJ8RxdSk9+paYx08k6uk3XsEVRhWmPJYgZ/81wOibm2HhRl+ qEOcDXOrPvpYgTM6GWJuGfOVG6ASTQ36wh3ZjdjfpdGN0Rq2fGgyxIZZPr8q2yOqE4TOPKzWFpL s3wVqaj9dGIf2WXjITp/u7aL4xFgHpINEtjAJkDJKwBp93g+xzfkyDssNSqNA6qMxUK4MZdtTRM gx+7Sy2JWEuKQO1yZ9ojJd4np8+VAeB4saMlkvtERXhoBDv9QPbMrxOdybS6cG47XEsXFWKF+Zi gZ1gyiAzBj5o+c2N6XvP+qWZa1mAUP36dnQ1q2gU2XqOsKkRDhqqqrO28FEEhJWZXcmFWqasyWn ek50LuK4ro6sE2EudzHsqDx46gniJzyDkkljsIWjpRmzewAjNUO/kUJLWhVsQGZtSKdOH6kIe6g c27OBYQ70= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:2752:b0:37e:10d1:c05b with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-389417e4858mr1550105a91.22.1783500442624; Wed, 08 Jul 2026 01:47:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ubuntu.. ([61.144.108.37]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-2ccc9d5bdf5sm24281325ad.73.2026.07.08.01.47.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 08 Jul 2026 01:47:22 -0700 (PDT) From: Jing Wu To: wangzhaolong@fnnas.com Cc: jirislaby@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yuanql9@chinatelecom.cn Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] serial: 8250: fix use-after-free in IRQ chain handling Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2026 16:47:17 +0800 Message-ID: <20260708084717.421487-1-realwujing@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: <20260708072306.3921604-1-wangzhaolong@fnnas.com> References: <20260527092052.2086342-1-wangzhaolong@fnnas.com> <20260708031115.3757150-1-wangzhaolong@fnnas.com> <20260708072306.3921604-1-wangzhaolong@fnnas.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > This accusation is not acceptable. It's not an accusation. It's a timeline. Your v1 predates ours by one day — not in dispute. But your v1 didn't work. You confirmed this yourself on May 29 when you wrote "v3 fixes the Bugzilla reproducer on my setup" — on *our* v3 thread, not yours. If your v1 already fixed the problem, you wouldn't have needed to test our v3 and report back. > That same locking change also closes the irq_info UAF window Your v1 commit message never mentions use-after-free. It discusses only "Unbalanced enable for IRQ." Our v1 was the first to identify and document both races. Claiming retroactively that your v1 "also" fixed UAF is revisionist. > For v3, the irq_chain_mutex rename was made in response to Jiri's review > comment Jiri made that comment on *our* v6, not yours. He reviewed our code. You took a review comment from our thread and applied it to your patch as if it were your own insight. > The __must_hold() and lockdep_assert_held() additions ... are not the > functional fix. They were added in our v5, reviewed by Greg on our v4. You copied them into your v3 and listed them as "Changes in v3" with zero attribution. Now look at the timeline: Jul 7 22:06 Our v6 — posted to the list Jul 8 11:11 Your v2 — next morning, same lock-move skeleton Jul 8 15:23 Your v3 — hours later, copies irq_chain_mutex rename, __must_hold(), lockdep_assert_held() from our v5/v7 If we hadn't replied to Jiri and sent v6, would your v2 exist the next morning? If we hadn't renamed hash_mutex in v7, would your v3 appear hours later with the same rename? The answer is obvious. > I do not agree to a Co-developed-by tag for my patch We added Co-developed-by for you on our v7. The only reason we did so is that you confirmed the fix worked on your setup — nothing more. You reported the bug, you tested the fix, we credited you. That's what open source contributors do. You, on the other hand, copied our lockdep annotations, our static analysis annotations, our mutex rename — all reviewed by Jiri and Greg on *our* patches — and passed them off as your own changelog entries. And now you're saying you won't extend the same basic courtesy in return. Copying is fine under GPLv2. Presenting it as your own work is not. You reported the bug. We fixed it. You copied our improvements. Add the tags. Jing