CVE-2024-39476

CVE-2024-39476

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: md/raid5: fix deadlock that raid5d() wait for itself to clear MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING Xiao reported that lvm2 test lvconvert-raid-takeover.sh can hang with small possibility, the root cause is exactly the same as commit bed9e27baf52 ("Revert "md/raid5: Wait for MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING in raid5d"") However, Dan reported another hang after that, and junxiao investigated the problem and found out that this is caused by plugged bio can't issue from raid5d(). Current implementation in raid5d() has a weird dependence: 1) md_check_recovery() from raid5d() must hold 'reconfig_mutex' to clear MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING; 2) raid5d() handles IO in a deadloop, until all IO are issued; 3) IO from raid5d() must wait for MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING to be cleared; This behaviour is introduce before v2.6, and for consequence, if other context hold 'reconfig_mutex', and md_check_recovery() can't update super_block, then raid5d() will waste one cp...

CVE-2024-39476

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: md/raid5: fix deadlock that raid5d() wait for itself to clear MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING Xiao reported that lvm2 test lvconvert-raid-takeover.sh can hang with small possibility, the root cause is exactly the same as commit bed9e27baf52 ("Revert "md/raid5: Wait for MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING in raid5d"") However, Dan reported another hang after that, and junxiao investigated the problem and found out that this is caused by plugged bio can't issue from raid5d(). Current implementation in raid5d() has a weird dependence: 1) md_check_recovery() from raid5d() must hold 'reconfig_mutex' to clear MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING; 2) raid5d() handles IO in a deadloop, until all IO are issued; 3) IO from raid5d() must wait for MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING to be cleared; This behaviour is introduce before v2.6, and for consequence, if other context hold 'reconfig_mutex', and md_check_recovery() can't update super_block, then raid5d() will waste one cpu 100%...

CVE-2024-39476

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: md/raid5: fix deadlock that raid5d() wait for itself to clear MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING Xiao reported that lvm2 test lvconvert-raid-takeover.sh can hang with small possibility, the root cause is exactly the same as commit bed9e27baf52 ("Revert "md/raid5: Wait for MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING in raid5d"") However, Dan reported another hang after that, and junxiao investigated the problem and found out that this is caused by plugged bio can't issue from raid5d(). Current implementation in raid5d() has a weird dependence: 1) md_check_recovery() from raid5d() must hold 'reconfig_mutex' to clear MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING; 2) raid5d() handles IO in a deadloop, until all IO are issued; 3) IO from raid5d() must wait for MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING to be cleared; This behaviour is introduce before v2.6, and for consequence, if other context hold 'reconfig_mutex', and md_check_recovery() can't update super_block, then raid5d() will waste one cp

CVE-2024-39476

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: m ...

GHSA-wx95-q6gv-qpp4

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: md/raid5: fix deadlock that raid5d() wait for itself to clear MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING Xiao reported that lvm2 test lvconvert-raid-takeover.sh can hang with small possibility, the root cause is exactly the same as commit bed9e27baf52 ("Revert "md/raid5: Wait for MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING in raid5d"") However, Dan reported another hang after that, and junxiao investigated the problem and found out that this is caused by plugged bio can't issue from raid5d(). Current implementation in raid5d() has a weird dependence: 1) md_check_recovery() from raid5d() must hold 'reconfig_mutex' to clear MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING; 2) raid5d() handles IO in a deadloop, until all IO are issued; 3) IO from raid5d() must wait for MD_SB_CHANGE_PENDING to be cleared; This behaviour is introduce before v2.6, and for consequence, if other context hold 'reconfig_mutex', and md_check_recovery() can't update super_block, then raid5d() will waste one...