Referencing upstream fixes commit
dcf23ac3e846ca0cf626c155a0e3fcbbcf4fae8a ("locks: reinstate
locks_delete_block optimization") and commit
6d390e4b5d48ec03bb87e63cf0a2bff5f4e116da ("locks: fix a potential
use-after-free problem when wakeup a waiter") and possibly address
CVE-2019-19769.
Please apply to all relevant stable trees including 5.4, 4.19 and below.
Confirmed they apply cleanly to 5.4 and 4.19.
Signed-off-by: Mark Salyzyn <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:24:49AM -0700, Mark Salyzyn wrote:
> Referencing upstream fixes commit dcf23ac3e846ca0cf626c155a0e3fcbbcf4fae8a
> ("locks: reinstate locks_delete_block optimization") and commit
> 6d390e4b5d48ec03bb87e63cf0a2bff5f4e116da ("locks: fix a potential
> use-after-free problem when wakeup a waiter") and possibly address
> CVE-2019-19769.
>
> Please apply to all relevant stable trees including 5.4, 4.19 and below.
> Confirmed they apply cleanly to 5.4 and 4.19.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Salyzyn <[email protected]>
>
> Cc: [email protected]
>
> Cc: [email protected]
>
> Cc: [email protected]
>
These are all queued up for the next round of 5.4 and 5.5 stable
releases,but they do not seem to apply to 4.19.
And why do you think they apply to 4.19, that's not what 6d390e4b5d48
("locks: fix a potential use-after-free problem when wakeup a waiter")
says.
confused,
greg k-h
On 3/24/20 7:43 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 07:24:49AM -0700, Mark Salyzyn wrote:
>> Referencing upstream fixes commit dcf23ac3e846ca0cf626c155a0e3fcbbcf4fae8a
>> ("locks: reinstate locks_delete_block optimization") and commit
>> 6d390e4b5d48ec03bb87e63cf0a2bff5f4e116da ("locks: fix a potential
>> use-after-free problem when wakeup a waiter") and possibly address
>> CVE-2019-19769.
>>
>> Please apply to all relevant stable trees including 5.4, 4.19 and below.
>> Confirmed they apply cleanly to 5.4 and 4.19.
>>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Salyzyn <[email protected]>
>>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>>
> These are all queued up for the next round of 5.4 and 5.5 stable
> releases,but they do not seem to apply to 4.19.
>
> And why do you think they apply to 4.19, that's not what 6d390e4b5d48
> ("locks: fix a potential use-after-free problem when wakeup a waiter")
> says.
When I used my tool to apply the pair by sha, I failed to notice that
they were _both_ skipped because they are _both_ already present and
read that as clean without looking at _what_ got applied or not.
(I will be fixing my tool)
> confused,
<sorry>
>
> greg k-h