Re: [Patch v2 2/6] cifs: Allocate validate negotiation request through kmalloc

[Steve French]

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 3:11 PM, Long Li via samba-technical
<samba-technical@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Subject: RE: [Patch v2 2/6] cifs: Allocate validate negotiation request through
>> kmalloc
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: linux-rdma-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-rdma-
>> > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Long Li
>> > Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 2:17 PM
>> > To: Steve French <sfrench@xxxxxxxxx>; linux-cifs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>> > samba- technical@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
>> > rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Cc: longli <longli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Subject: [Patch v2 2/6] cifs: Allocate validate negotiation request
>> > through kmalloc
>> >
>> > From: Long Li <longli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > The data buffer allocated on the stack can't be DMA'ed, and hence
>> > can't send through RDMA via SMB Direct.
>> >
>> > Fix this by allocating the request on the heap in smb3_validate_negotiate.
>> >
>> > Fixes: ff1c038addc4f205d5f1ede449426c7d316c0eed "Check SMB3 dialects
>> > against downgrade attacks"
>> >
>>
>> Format is:
>> Fixes: ff1c038addc4 ("Check SMB3 dialects against downgrade attacks") It
>> should be right above Signed-off signature.
>
> I will fix up and resend this patch.
>
> How about the rest patches (1, 3-6) in the series? If they don't need any changes, is it okay that I resend this one only?

Doesn't matter to me either way - I already merged patch 1 in any case.

>> > Changes in v2:
>> > Removed duplicated code on freeing buffers on function exit.
>> > (Thanks to Parav Pandit <parav@xxxxxxxxxxxx>)



-- 
Thanks,

Steve