Re: [PATCH] ext2/super: Fix a possible sleep-in-atomic bug in parse_options

From: Jia-Ju Bai
Date: Fri Oct 06 2017 - 21:56:33 EST


Thanks for your reply.
I agree that extra allocation in match_number() and match_u64int() may be unnecessary.

Thanks,
Jia-Ju Bai


On 2017/10/7 9:37, Linus Torvalds wrote:
On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 6:20 PM, Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@xxxxxxx> wrote:
To fix it, GFP_KERNEL is replaced with GFP_ATOMIC.
This bug is found by my static analysis tool and my code review.
I'm not saying your patch is wrong, but it's a shame that we do that
extra allocation in match_number() and match_u64int(), and that we
don't have anything that is just size-limited.

And there really isn't anything saying that we shouldn't do the same
silly thing to match_u64int(). Maybe we don't have any actual users
that need it for now, but still..

Oh well.

I do wonder if we shouldn't just use something like

"skip leading zeroes, copy to size-limited stack location instead"

because the input length really *is* limited once you skip leading
zeroes (and whatever base marker we have). We might have at most a
64-bit value in octal, so 22 bytes max.

But I guess just changing the two GFP_KERNEL's to GFP_ATOMIC is much simpler.

Linus