Re: [PATCH bpf 0/2] Two bpf fixes

On Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 02:30:46AM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:

First one is a panic I ran into while testing the second
one where we got several syzkaller reports. Series here
fixes both.

Thanks!

Applied, thanks.

The second patch looks dubious to me though.
Nothing in the kernel tree checks the return value of set_memory_ro()
and my understanding that it can fail only when part of huge page
is being marked and pages have to be split. In bpf case I don't think
it's ever the case, so the patch is silencing purely theoretical
syzbot splat that can happen with artificial error injection.
I bet we're still going to see this splat in set_memory_rw.
imo the better fix would have been to drop WARN_ON from both.