Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To:     Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Cc:     "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
        syzbot+4a03518df1e31b537066@syzkaller.appspotmail.com,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ext4: Fix data races when using cached status extents
Date:   Sat, 13 May 2023 00:59:29 -0400
Message-Id: <168395396129.1443054.18017236499948982224.b4-ty@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20230504125524.10802-1-jack@suse.cz>
References: <20230504125524.10802-1-jack@suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 04 May 2023 14:55:24 +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> When using cached extent stored in extent status tree in tree->cache_es
> another process holding ei->i_es_lock for reading can be racing with us
> setting new value of tree->cache_es. If the compiler would decide to
> refetch tree->cache_es at an unfortunate moment, it could result in a
> bogus in_range() check. Fix the possible race by using READ_ONCE() when
> using tree->cache_es only under ei->i_es_lock for reading.
> 
> [...]

Applied, thanks!

[1/1] ext4: Fix data races when using cached status extents
      commit: 185e33d15ebf4a9d779fa78249b6cc95a071967e

Best regards,
-- 
Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>