On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 3:02 PM Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 11:39:52 -0700 Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > At namespace creation time there is the potential for the "expected to
> > be zero" fields of a 'pfn' info-block to be filled with indeterminate
> > data. While the kernel buffer is zeroed on allocation it is immediately
> > overwritten by nd_pfn_validate() filling it with the current contents of
> > the on-media info-block location. For fields like, 'flags' and the
> > 'padding' it potentially means that future implementations can not rely
> > on those fields being zero.
> >
> > In preparation to stop using the 'start_pad' and 'end_trunc' fields for
> > section alignment, arrange for fields that are not explicitly
> > initialized to be guaranteed zero. Bump the minor version to indicate it
> > is safe to assume the 'padding' and 'flags' are zero. Otherwise, this
> > corruption is expected to benign since all other critical fields are
> > explicitly initialized.
> >
> > Fixes: 32ab0a3f5170 ("libnvdimm, pmem: 'struct page' for pmem")
> > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Buried at the end of a 12 patch series. Should this be a standalone
> patch, suitable for a prompt merge?
It's not a problem unless a kernel implementation is explicitly
expecting those fields to be zero-initialized. I only marked it for
-stable in case some future kernel backports patch12. Otherwise it's
benign on older kernels that don't have patch12 since all fields are
indeed initialized.
