Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 23:41:28 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg@linbit.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>, Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        wolfgang.glas@iteg.at, christoph.lechleitner@iteg.at,
        philipp.reisner@linbit.com, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drbd-dev@lists.linbit.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drbd: Fix kernel_sendmsg() usage - potential NULL
 deref
Message-ID: <20161109234127.GI19539@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <60514f9b-6f1c-8b7e-429a-490cdaae14d8@kernel.dk>
 <1478728378-22289-1-git-send-email-lars.ellenberg@linbit.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1478728378-22289-1-git-send-email-lars.ellenberg@linbit.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.0 (2016-08-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1252
Lines: 23

On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 10:52:58PM +0100, Lars Ellenberg wrote:

> This should go into 4.9,
> and into all stable branches since and including v4.0,
> which is the first to contain the exposing change.
> 
> It is correct for all stable branches older than that as well
> (which contain the DRBD driver; which is 2.6.33 and up).
> 
> It requires a small "conflict" resolution for v4.4 and earlier, with v4.5
> we dropped the comment block immediately preceding the kernel_sendmsg().

ACK.  I'll rebase commit 7a4992299554 ([drbd] use sock_sendmsg()) on top
of that as soon as it hits the mainline.  For conspiracy theorists out
there (hi, Brad) - that commit (killing the modifications of iovec and
reinitializing msg->iov_iter; just set it once and let sendmsg() update
it in normal fashion) had been sitting around since late 2014.  It happened
to fix the bug in question, without a single line refering to that in commit
message.  Reason: I had completely missed the problem; intent of that
loop had been obvious and replacement had obviously done what was intended
there.  What I had failed to spot was that the code in there did *not*
match that intent.  Replacement does.  And unlike the minimal fix (either
version) it doesn't belong in -stable.