On 9/3/24 7:32 PM, Yu Kuai wrote: > Hi, > > 在 2024/09/03 23:51, Jens Axboe 写道: >> On 9/2/24 7:03 AM, Yu Kuai wrote: >>> From: Yu Kuai <yukuai3@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Our syzkaller report a UAF problem(details in patch 1), however it can't >>> be reporduced. And this set are some corner cases fix that might be >>> related, and they are found by code review. >>> >>> Yu Kuai (4): >>> block, bfq: fix possible UAF for bfqq->bic with merge chain >>> block, bfq: choose the last bfqq from merge chain in >>> bfq_setup_cooperator() >>> block, bfq: don't break merge chain in bfq_split_bfqq() >>> block, bfq: use bfq_reassign_last_bfqq() in bfq_bfqq_move() >>> >>> block/bfq-cgroup.c | 7 +------ >>> block/bfq-iosched.c | 17 +++++++++++------ >>> block/bfq-iosched.h | 2 ++ >>> 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) >> >> BFQ is effectively unmaintained, and has been for quite a while at >> this point. I'll apply these, thanks for looking into it, but I think we >> should move BFQ to an unmaintained state at this point. > > Sorry to hear that, we would be willing to take on the responsibility of > maintaining this code, please let me know if there are any specific > guidelines or processes we should follow. We do have customers are using > bfq in downstream kernels, and we are still running lots of test for > bfq. Most important is just reviewing fixes and tending to bug reports, and then collecting those fixes and sending them out to the list+me for inclusion. Not much more needs to happen, this series is a good example of it. -- Jens Axboe
