From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH net 0/3] rxrpc: Fixes
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 23:05:19 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <157688311975.18694.10870615714269857980.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk> (raw)
Here are a couple of bugfixes plus a patch that makes one of the bugfixes
easier:
(1) Move the ping and mutex unlock on a new call from rxrpc_input_packet()
into rxrpc_new_incoming_call(), which it calls. This means the
lock-unlock section is entirely within the latter function. This
simplifies patch (2).
(2) Don't take the call->user_mutex at all in the softirq path. Mutexes
aren't allowed to be taken or released there and a patch was merged
that caused a warning to be emitted every time this happened. Looking
at the code again, it looks like that taking the mutex isn't actually
necessary, as the value of call->state will block access to the call.
(3) Fix the incoming call path to check incoming calls earlier to reject
calls to RPC services for which we don't have a security key of the
appropriate class. This avoids an assertion failure if YFS tries
making a secure call to the kafs cache manager RPC service.
The patches are tagged here:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dhowells/linux-fs.git
rxrpc-fixes-20191220
and can also be found on the following branch:
http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/dhowells/linux-fs.git/log/?h=rxrpc-fixes
David
---
David Howells (3):
rxrpc: Unlock new call in rxrpc_new_incoming_call() rather than the caller
rxrpc: Don't take call->user_mutex in rxrpc_new_incoming_call()
rxrpc: Fix missing security check on incoming calls
net/rxrpc/ar-internal.h | 10 +++++--
net/rxrpc/call_accept.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
net/rxrpc/conn_event.c | 16 +----------
net/rxrpc/conn_service.c | 4 +++
net/rxrpc/input.c | 18 ------------
net/rxrpc/rxkad.c | 5 ++-
net/rxrpc/security.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
7 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 98 deletions(-)
next reply other threads:[~2019-12-20 23:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-20 23:05 David Howells [this message]
2019-12-25 0:15 ` [PATCH net 0/3] rxrpc: Fixes David Miller
2019-12-20 23:05 David Howells
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=157688311975.18694.10870615714269857980.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk \
--to=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-afs@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).