From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.223.130]) (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 A6AD160B95 for ; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 08:56:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709715413; cv=none; b=S4ULMRBUxAb+ew3ARiRKaoZ1xI3On2UlokbVu0WZ7smIkTGGAYeinmkRucjEueGLoD7nxS+O/4FxdfaX+Mxrt2u+NXFw+bMJiV+WbgODR+eg14yhJ/CJPfoaLZjSiI440tQsRxx21KSaZn+XwgsOFDc7hUAdluaJxfUQmEDMo1s= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709715413; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4nvFQc5+G18sYCQZQXyX7kk6D0mhWRA+LSxQm3IlA0k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RA2CyZ7CBaCjH7BfeekErEgzDagM9fMW6eCCqletJkKksGxb8OgokqTzfGoiMrrDy2ujHLWHuULIc0YbQ5ZcbNvx5woP/ogBRvn4hEzfCfLf7/YTom66CLVcpku/m/xIzG77r2ocuqs8UiJbezuL/mlLOZnuDaezblrVNk1CoO0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=dkYhWR9+; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b=dkYhWR9+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=195.135.223.130 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="dkYhWR9+"; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="dkYhWR9+" Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAE0C4DD02; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 08:56:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1709715409; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bdycLrzJy1w4EUGhhUtMStsknbzgfSCFfV2j5KkcqJg=; b=dkYhWR9+0U0gYjGbTxaRHZA5/1OXeHwvTRr0o0CTjPb1UZnpKrLt8z53kZ5JT5dKsu57i4 8ihZhhkPzno1Pun56CbpSWfxkxblMqWIk+ZPtSzEz+qZq5VXWh2GiRhQCevLQzRlX5I2cW mHUa4t7gv223+yW7zT82qcM3yXLTD3M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1709715409; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=bdycLrzJy1w4EUGhhUtMStsknbzgfSCFfV2j5KkcqJg=; b=dkYhWR9+0U0gYjGbTxaRHZA5/1OXeHwvTRr0o0CTjPb1UZnpKrLt8z53kZ5JT5dKsu57i4 8ihZhhkPzno1Pun56CbpSWfxkxblMqWIk+ZPtSzEz+qZq5VXWh2GiRhQCevLQzRlX5I2cW mHUa4t7gv223+yW7zT82qcM3yXLTD3M= Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A19E613AAD; Wed, 6 Mar 2024 08:56:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id O1ObJdEv6GVEbwAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Wed, 06 Mar 2024 08:56:49 +0000 Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 09:56:49 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: cve@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: CVE-2023-52560: mm/damon/vaddr-test: fix memory leak in damon_do_test_apply_three_regions() Message-ID: References: <2024030252-CVE-2023-52560-c3de@gregkh> <2024030527-sinless-platter-510a@gregkh> <2024030604-unstuffed-grant-758c@gregkh> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2024030604-unstuffed-grant-758c@gregkh> Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=dkYhWR9+ X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.31 / 50.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.com:s=susede1]; SPAMHAUS_XBL(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DWL_DNSWL_HI(-3.50)[suse.com:dkim]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.com:s=susede1]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.com:+]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.com:dkim]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%] X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd1.dmz-prg2.suse.org X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: BAE0C4DD02 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Score: -6.31 X-Spam-Flag: NO On Wed 06-03-24 08:42:07, Greg KH wrote: > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 08:49:42AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Tue 05-03-24 22:25:11, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 05:51:11PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > On Sat 02-03-24 22:59:54, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > Description > > > > > =========== > > > > > > > > > > In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: > > > > > > > > > > mm/damon/vaddr-test: fix memory leak in damon_do_test_apply_three_regions() > > > > > > > > > > When CONFIG_DAMON_VADDR_KUNIT_TEST=y and making CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK=y > > > > > and CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK_AUTO_SCAN=y, the below memory leak is detected. > > > > > > > > This is a kunit test case AFAICS. Is this really a CVE material? > > > > > > People run kunit tests on real systems (again, we do not dictate use > > > cases.) So yes, fixing a memory leak that can be triggered is resolving > > > a weakness and so should get a CVE I would think, right? > > > > This is stretching the meaning of CVE beyond my imagination. Up to you > > to decide but I yet have to see a real production system that casually > > runs unit test just for . > > I know of at least one place that uses kunit tests in "production", and > I know of more that will be enabling them in newer releases, so this is > a real thing. I would be really curious to hear more details. > Again, we just mark "fixes for a weakness" as a CVE and > let others decide what to do with it. OK, this is something we have discussed and concluded to disagree. Not my call though but I would really like to hear _who_ outside of the stable tree userbase is really appreciating this approach. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs