4.13.7-stable review

PATCH In review Greg Kroah-Hartman 5 participants 12 messages Oct 12, 2017 – Oct 13, 2017 Stable branch

Share & tools

Greg Kroah-Hartman

author maintainer

2017-10-12 21:31 UTC #0 lore raw

cover 4.13.7-stable review

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.

Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.

The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:

	kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.13.7-rc1.gz

or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.13.y
and the diffstat can be found below.

thanks,

greg k-h

-------------
Pseudo-Shortlog of commits:

Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>

    Linux 4.13.7-rc1

Kees Cook <[email protected]>
waitid(): Add missing access_ok() checks

Wim Van Sebroeck <[email protected]>
watchdog: Revert "iTCO_wdt: all versions count down twice"

-------------

Diffstat:

 Documentation/watchdog/watchdog-parameters.txt |  2 +-
 Makefile                                       |  4 ++--
 drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c                    | 22 ++++++++++++----------
 kernel/exit.c                                  |  6 ++++++
 4 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

Greg Kroah-Hartman

author maintainer

2017-10-12 21:31 UTC #1 lore raw

PATCH 1/2 watchdog: Revert "iTCO_wdt: all versions count down twice"

4.13-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Wim Van Sebroeck <[email protected]>

commit fc61e83a29308601e6e8a0759e24fc8fe2122692 upstream.

This reverts commit 1fccb73011ea8a5fa0c6d357c33fa29c695139ea. Reported as Bug 196509 - iTCO_wdt regression reboot before timeout expire

Signed-off-by Wim Van Sebroeck <[email protected]>

Cc Martin Wilck <[email protected]>

Cc Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>

---
 Documentation/watchdog/watchdog-parameters.txt |    2 +-
 drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c                    |   22 ++++++++++++----------
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

Documentation/watchdog/watchdog-parameters.txt +1 -1

@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ nowayout: Watchdog cannot be stopped onc
 -------------------------------------------------
 iTCO_wdt:
 heartbeat: Watchdog heartbeat in seconds.
-	(5<=heartbeat<=74 (TCO v1) or 1226 (TCO v2), default=30)
+	(2<heartbeat<39 (TCO v1) or 613 (TCO v2), default=30)
 nowayout: Watchdog cannot be stopped once started
 	(default=kernel config parameter)
 -------------------------------------------------

drivers/watchdog/iTCO_wdt.c +12 ~~-10~~

@@ -306,15 +306,16 @@ static int iTCO_wdt_ping(struct watchdog
 
 	iTCO_vendor_pre_keepalive(p->smi_res, wd_dev->timeout);
 
-	/* Reset the timeout status bit so that the timer
-	 * needs to count down twice again before rebooting */
-	outw(0x0008, TCO1_STS(p));	/* write 1 to clear bit */
-
 	/* Reload the timer by writing to the TCO Timer Counter register */
-	if (p->iTCO_version >= 2)
+	if (p->iTCO_version >= 2) {
 		outw(0x01, TCO_RLD(p));
-	else if (p->iTCO_version == 1)
+	} else if (p->iTCO_version == 1) {
+		/* Reset the timeout status bit so that the timer
+		 * needs to count down twice again before rebooting */
+		outw(0x0008, TCO1_STS(p));	/* write 1 to clear bit */
+
 		outb(0x01, TCO_RLD(p));
+	}
 
 	spin_unlock(&p->io_lock);
 	return 0;

@@ -327,8 +328,11 @@ static int iTCO_wdt_set_timeout(struct w
 	unsigned char val8;
 	unsigned int tmrval;
 
-	/* The timer counts down twice before rebooting */
-	tmrval = seconds_to_ticks(p, t) / 2;
+	tmrval = seconds_to_ticks(p, t);
+
+	/* For TCO v1 the timer counts down twice before rebooting */
+	if (p->iTCO_version == 1)
+		tmrval /= 2;
 
 	/* from the specs: */
 	/* "Values of 0h-3h are ignored and should not be attempted" */

@@ -381,8 +385,6 @@ static unsigned int iTCO_wdt_get_timelef
 		spin_lock(&p->io_lock);
 		val16 = inw(TCO_RLD(p));
 		val16 &= 0x3ff;
-		if (!(inw(TCO1_STS(p)) & 0x0008))
-			val16 += (inw(TCOv2_TMR(p)) & 0x3ff);
 		spin_unlock(&p->io_lock);
 
 		time_left = ticks_to_seconds(p, val16);

Greg Kroah-Hartman

author maintainer

2017-10-12 21:26 UTC #2 lore raw

PATCH 2/2 waitid(): Add missing access_ok() checks

In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman

4.13-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Kees Cook <[email protected]>

commit 96ca579a1ecc943b75beba58bebb0356f6cc4b51 upstream.

Adds missing access_ok() checks.

CVE-2017-5123

Reported-by Chris Salls <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Kees Cook <[email protected]>

Acked-by Al Viro <[email protected]>

Fixes 4c48abe91be0 ("waitid(): switch copyout of siginfo to unsafe_put_user()")

Signed-off-by Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>

Signed-off-by Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>

---
 kernel/exit.c |    6 ++++++
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

kernel/exit.c +6 -0

@@ -1611,6 +1611,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(waitid, int, which, pid_
 	if (!infop)
 		return err;
 
+	if (!access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, infop, sizeof(*infop)))
+		goto Efault;
+
 	user_access_begin();
 	unsafe_put_user(signo, &infop->si_signo, Efault);
 	unsafe_put_user(0, &infop->si_errno, Efault);

@@ -1736,6 +1739,9 @@ COMPAT_SYSCALL_DEFINE5(waitid,
 	if (!infop)
 		return err;
 
+	if (!access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, infop, sizeof(*infop)))
+		goto Efault;
+
 	user_access_begin();
 	unsafe_put_user(signo, &infop->si_signo, Efault);
 	unsafe_put_user(0, &infop->si_errno, Efault);

David Daney

2017-10-13 23:55 UTC #3 lore raw

Re: [PATCH 4.13 2/2] waitid(): Add missing access_ok() checks

Quoted 26 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

4.13-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
commit 96ca579a1ecc943b75beba58bebb0356f6cc4b51 upstream.
Adds missing access_ok() checks.
CVE-2017-5123
Reported-by Chris Salls <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Acked-by Al Viro <[email protected]>
Fixes 4c48abe91be0 ("waitid(): switch copyout of siginfo to unsafe_put_user()")
Signed-off-by Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
---
  kernel/exit.c |    6 ++++++
  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)

kernel/exit.c SYSCALL_DEFINE5(waitid, int, which, pid_ · line 1615

Quoted 5 lines

kernel/exit.c +2 -0

@@ -1611,6 +1611,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(waitid, int, which, pid_
  	if (!infop)
  		return err;
 
+	if (!access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, infop, sizeof(*infop)))
+		goto Efault;

Not to be a pedant, but...

In the case that access_ok() fails, we invoke user_access_end() at the goto target without first invoking user_access_begin(). On x86 this imbalance is probably not a problem.

For other architectures that may want to implement user_access_{begin,end}() in the future, I think we should either specify that unbalanced calls to these two functions are expected and must work, or balance them here and specify that they must be balanced.

Thanks,
David Daney

Shuah Khan

2017-10-12 23:45 UTC #4 lore raw

In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman

Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.

Quoted 9 lines

Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.
The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
	kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.13.7-rc1.gz
or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.13.y
and the diffstat can be found below.

Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions. kselftest run regression since 4.13.6

selftests: posix_timers

selftests: raw_skew
========================================
not ok 1..7 selftests: raw_skew [FAIL]

No idea why yet. cc'ing John Stultz to see if he has any ideas.

thanks,
-- Shuah

John Stultz

2017-10-13 00:09 UTC #5 lore raw

Quoted 16 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.
Quoted 9 lines
Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.
The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
      kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.13.7-rc1.gz
or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.13.y
and the diffstat can be found below.

Quoted 8 lines

Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions. kselftest run regression since 4.13.6
selftests: posix_timers
selftests: raw_skew
========================================
not ok 1..7 selftests: raw_skew [FAIL]

Hrm... Did raw_skew provide any other output?

Also, did you turn ntpd off before running?

-john

Shuah Khan

2017-10-13 14:05 UTC #6 lore raw

Quoted 26 lines · John Stultz

Quoted 16 lines · Shuah Khan
Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.
Quoted 9 lines
Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.
The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
      kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.13.7-rc1.gz
or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.13.y
and the diffstat can be found below.
Quoted 8 lines
Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions. kselftest run regression since 4.13.6
selftests: posix_timers
selftests: raw_skew
========================================
not ok 1..7 selftests: raw_skew [FAIL]

Quoted 6 lines

Hrm... Did raw_skew provide any other output?
Also, did you turn ntpd off before running?
-john

John/Greg,

Here is the detailed report fromn this test. I didn't disable ntpd.

WARNING: ADJ_OFFSET in progress, this will cause inaccurate results
Estimating clock drift: -16.319(est) -8.913(act) [FAILED]
Bail out!
Pass 0 Fail 0 Xfail 0 Xpass 0 Skip 0 Error 0
1..0

I can keep on eye on this. Not a show stopper for releasing the rc.

thanks,
-- Shuah

Shuah Khan

2017-10-13 15:12 UTC #7 lore raw

Quoted 38 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 26 lines · John Stultz
Quoted 16 lines · Shuah Khan
Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.
Quoted 9 lines
Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.
The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
      kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.13.7-rc1.gz
or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.13.y
and the diffstat can be found below.
Quoted 8 lines
Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions. kselftest run regression since 4.13.6
selftests: posix_timers
selftests: raw_skew
========================================
not ok 1..7 selftests: raw_skew [FAIL]
Quoted 6 lines
Hrm... Did raw_skew provide any other output?
Also, did you turn ntpd off before running?
-john
John/Greg,
Here is the detailed report fromn this test. I didn't disable ntpd.

Quoted 8 lines

WARNING: ADJ_OFFSET in progress, this will cause inaccurate results
Estimating clock drift: -16.319(est) -8.913(act) [FAILED]
Bail out!
Pass 0 Fail 0 Xfail 0 Xpass 0 Skip 0 Error 0
1..0
I can keep on eye on this. Not a show stopper for releasing the rc.

Odd. Doesn't fail on 4.14-rc4 and 4.13.6. I will try to isolate the problem. Definitely follows 4.13-rc7

thanks,
-- Shuah

John Stultz

2017-10-13 17:00 UTC #8 lore raw

In reply to Shuah Khan

Quoted 31 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 30 lines · John Stultz
Quoted 16 lines · Shuah Khan
Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.
Quoted 9 lines
Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.
The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
      kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.13.7-rc1.gz
or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.13.y
and the diffstat can be found below.
Quoted 8 lines
Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions. kselftest run regression since 4.13.6
selftests: posix_timers
selftests: raw_skew
========================================
not ok 1..7 selftests: raw_skew [FAIL]
Hrm... Did raw_skew provide any other output?
Also, did you turn ntpd off before running?

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 2 lines
-john
John/Greg,
Here is the detailed report fromn this test. I didn't disable ntpd.
WARNING: ADJ_OFFSET in progress, this will cause inaccurate results

So this warning means someone is adjusting the clock while the test is running. Can you insure you are running the test with ntpd/chrony(/whatever systemd's time sync is) turned off?

thanks
-john

Greg Kroah-Hartman

author maintainer

2017-10-13 05:41 UTC #9 lore raw

In reply to Shuah Khan

Quoted 19 lines · Shuah Khan

Quoted 5 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.
Quoted 9 lines
Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.
The whole patch series can be found in one patch at:
	kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/stable-review/patch-4.13.7-rc1.gz
or in the git tree and branch at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable-rc.git linux-4.13.y
and the diffstat can be found below.
Compiled and booted on my test system. No dmesg regressions. kselftest run regression since 4.13.6

Quoted 7 lines

selftests: posix_timers
selftests: raw_skew
========================================
not ok 1..7 selftests: raw_skew [FAIL]
No idea why yet. cc'ing John Stultz to see if he has any ideas.

That's odd, given the small number of patches here...

thanks for testing.

greg k-h

Guenter Roeck

2017-10-13 12:41 UTC #10 lore raw

In reply to Greg Kroah-Hartman

Quoted 8 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman

This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.
Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.

Build results:

	total: 145 pass: 145 fail: 0
Qemu test results:
	total: 123 pass: 123 fail: 0

Details are available at http://kerneltests.org/builders.

Guenter

Greg Kroah-Hartman

author maintainer

2017-10-13 12:54 UTC #11 lore raw

Quoted 10 lines · Guenter Roeck

Quoted 8 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 4.13.7 release. There are 2 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response to this one. If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please let me know.
Responses should be made by Sat Oct 14 21:25:27 UTC 2017. Anything received after that time might be too late.

Quoted 6 lines

Build results:
	total: 145 pass: 145 fail: 0
Qemu test results:
	total: 123 pass: 123 fail: 0
Details are available at http://kerneltests.org/builders.

Wonderful, thanks for testing and letting me know.

greg k-h