linux-kernel - Re: mlock() return value issue in kernel 2.6.23.17

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed,  8 Oct 2008 09:59:13 +0900 (JST)
From:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To:	"Yanping Du" <Yanping.Du@...adomain.com>
Cc:	kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<yanping.du@...il.com>
Subject: Re: mlock() return value issue in kernel 2.6.23.17

Hi Yanping,

> Hi Kosaki,
> 
>   Seems SUSv3 has more requirements beyond errno return code. Upon
> failure (EAGAIN, etc), it requires .no change is made to any locks in
> the address space of the process., but Linux mlock(2) will set vma flag
> as VM_LOCKED even if make_pages_present() fails for some pages in the
> vma. Any comment on this ?
> 
> SUSv3: http://www.unix.org/single_unix_specification/
> 
> "Upon successful completion, the mlock() and munlock() functions shall
> return a value of zero. Otherwise, no change is made to any locks in the
> address space of the process, and the function shall return a value of
> -1 and set errno to indicate the error."

Correct.

However, I haven't seen this behavior cause any trouble.
Do you know any case?

So, if nobody feel awful, I don't interest it so much ;)



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/