From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 557F5C47089 for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 20:31:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3885B613E9 for ; Thu, 27 May 2021 20:31:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235823AbhE0Ucw (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2021 16:32:52 -0400 Received: from smtp-fw-9103.amazon.com ([207.171.188.200]:54120 "EHLO smtp-fw-9103.amazon.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235539AbhE0Ucv (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 May 2021 16:32:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=amazon.com; i=@amazon.com; q=dns/txt; s=amazon201209; t=1622147478; x=1653683478; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:references:mime-version: in-reply-to:subject; bh=K6dlUPbkaXkiIQCE8kFQ1SvWc0eC53wXP5Y3FFkH3J0=; b=rTv7vlgcAstX+p4gAXWAetPv+ZA1e9VpLFixNkpN9hiatFw/NPS43F/W j04xemI2atIyLx2w+4SshmholdzDzkC7t6JscQRPK6WS8hglE0PLMk0gn Rqs7TDIZ7iDxCHzCgg6YBvsZD9aSOEZ8YKSxfrsum8cZ/CF5gbq+2bs+g 4=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,228,1616457600"; d="scan'208";a="935425854" Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.19 00/12] bpf: fix verifier selftests, add CVE-2021-29155 fixes Received: from pdx4-co-svc-p1-lb2-vlan3.amazon.com (HELO email-inbound-relay-2a-90c42d1d.us-west-2.amazon.com) ([10.25.36.214]) by smtp-border-fw-9103.sea19.amazon.com with ESMTP; 27 May 2021 20:31:17 +0000 Received: from EX13MTAUWA001.ant.amazon.com (pdx1-ws-svc-p6-lb9-vlan3.pdx.amazon.com [10.236.137.198]) by email-inbound-relay-2a-90c42d1d.us-west-2.amazon.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58613A1D8A; Thu, 27 May 2021 20:31:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from EX13D01UWA002.ant.amazon.com (10.43.160.74) by EX13MTAUWA001.ant.amazon.com (10.43.160.58) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.18; Thu, 27 May 2021 20:31:17 +0000 Received: from EX13MTAUEA002.ant.amazon.com (10.43.61.77) by EX13d01UWA002.ant.amazon.com (10.43.160.74) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.18; Thu, 27 May 2021 20:31:11 +0000 Received: from dev-dsk-fllinden-2c-d7720709.us-west-2.amazon.com (172.19.206.175) by mail-relay.amazon.com (10.43.61.169) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.0.1497.18 via Frontend Transport; Thu, 27 May 2021 20:31:10 +0000 Received: by dev-dsk-fllinden-2c-d7720709.us-west-2.amazon.com (Postfix, from userid 6262777) id A81BD1E; Thu, 27 May 2021 20:31:10 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 27 May 2021 20:31:10 +0000 From: Frank van der Linden To: Ovidiu Panait CC: , , , , , , Message-ID: <20210527203109.GA16000@dev-dsk-fllinden-2c-d7720709.us-west-2.amazon.com> References: <20210527173732.20860-1-ovidiu.panait@windriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210527173732.20860-1-ovidiu.panait@windriver.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 08:37:20PM +0300, Ovidiu Panait wrote: > This patchset is based on Frank van der Linden's backport of CVE-2021-29155 > fixes to 5.4 and 4.14: > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20210429220839.15667-1-fllinden@amazon.com/ > https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20210501043014.33300-1-fllinden@amazon.com/ > > With this series, all verifier selftests but one (that has already been > failing, see [1] for more details) succeed. Thanks for doing this - when this gets queued up for 4.19, I can then resubmit my 4.14 series. Daniel mentioned the CVE-2021-33200 fixes that were just added. If you add them to this series, I'll add them to the 4.14 series as well. They should be clean cherry-picks on top of this. The failing selftest is a little odd - why would it need allowing bounded loops to succeed if it was written before those were allowed? In any case, it was already failing, so that shouldn't stop this series from being applied. - Frank