On Fri, Sep 05, 2025 at 10:17:26PM +0900, Ryusuke Konishi wrote:
> Thank you very much, Nathan, for sharing your detailed report and
> proposing a fix.
>
> I actually performed a reproduction test in an environment with
> CONFIG_LTO_CLANG_THIN=y and confirmed that the CFI panic reoccurs, and
> that your patch fixes it.
>
> I also followed your analysis of sysfs and concluded that it is
> correct and that your changes to the two
> nilfs_feature_{revision,README}_show() functions are necessary. I'll
> check whether these were necessary from the beginning or whether they
> became necessary later.
>
> I'd like to send your proposed fixes upstream, but could you please
> send it to me and linux-nilfs in the form of a proper patch? (I'll
> need at least your SoB line).
Thanks for taking a look and confirming :) I have sent a patch with a
proper changelog along for you to take a look at.
https://lore.kernel.org/20250905-nilfs2-fix-features-cfi-violation-v1-1-b5d35136d813@xxxxxxxxxx/
>From what I can tell, this has always been wrong, hence that Fixes tag
but if you disagree, feel free to update it!
Cheers,
Nathan
