[SRU][J][PATCH 0/1] CVE-2024-50060

[Tim Whisonant]

SRU Justification:

[Impact]

io_uring: check if we need to reschedule during overflow flush

In terms of normal application usage, this list will always be empty.
And if an application does overflow a bit, it'll have a few entries.
However, nothing obviously prevents syzbot from running a test case
that generates a ton of overflow entries, and then flushing them can
take quite a while.

Check for needing to reschedule while flushing, and drop our locks and
do so if necessary. There's no state to maintain here as overflows
always prune from head-of-list, hence it's fine to drop and reacquire
the locks at the end of the loop.

[Fix]

Questing: not affected
Noble:    fixed separately
Jammy:    backported from upstream
Focal:    not affected
Bionic:   not affected
Xenial:   not affected
Trusty:   not affected

[Test Plan]

Compile and boot tested.

[Where problems could occur]

The change affects io_uring in the overflow list processing
code. Issues might affect slow consumer processes that cause
the overflow path to be taken.

Jens Axboe (1):
  io_uring: check if we need to reschedule during overflow flush

 io_uring/io_uring.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)

-- 
2.43.0