Bug 2320616 (CVE-2024-50060)

Summary: CVE-2024-50060 kernel: io_uring: check if we need to reschedule during overflow flush
Product: [Other] Security Response Reporter: OSIDB Bzimport <bzimport>
Component: vulnerabilityAssignee: Product Security DevOps Team <prodsec-dev>
Status: NEW --- QA Contact:
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: unspecifiedCC: dfreiber, drow, jburrell, vkumar
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: Security
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On: 2320903    
Bug Blocks:    

Description OSIDB Bzimport 2024-10-21 20:03:47 UTC 
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

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.
Comment 1 Avinash Hanwate 2024-10-22 10:22:47 UTC 
Upstream advisory:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-cve-announce/2024102135-CVE-2024-50060-6994@gregkh/T