linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -v2] rmap: make anon_vma_prepare link in all the anon

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

Date:	Wed, 07 Apr 2010 11:52:59 -0400
From:	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>,
	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>,
	sgunderson@...foot.com, hannes@...xchg.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] rmap: make anon_vma_prepare link in all the anon_vmas
 of a mergeable VMA

On 04/07/2010 11:30 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> I've said this now _three_ times, but let me repeat once more:
>
>   - the locking rules for that anon_vma_chain are very unclear. I _think_
>     you mean for them to be "mmap_sem held for writing, _or_ mmap_sem held
>     for reading and page_table_lock held", but nowhere is that actually
>     documented.

> Why is it so hard for you to just admit that? Especially after you
> yourself got it wrong.

You are right, the idea was to continue use the locking that
the anon_vma code was already using, without introducing any
new locking with the anon_vma patches.

However, it has become clear that this is no longer possible,
due to the need to hold a secondary lock across anon_vma_clone,
when we come from a code path that holds the mmap_sem for read.

>> +		merge_vma = find_mergeable_anon_vma(vma);
>> +		if (merge_vma) {
>> +			int ret;
>> +			spin_lock(&mm->page_table_lock);
>> +			ret = anon_vma_clone(vma, merge_vma);
>> +			if (!ret)
>> +				vma->anon_vma = merge_vma->anon_vma;
>> +			spin_unlock(&mm->page_table_lock);
>> +			return ret;
>> +		}
>
> Rik, the above is obviously total crap.
>
> anon_vma_clone() needs to allocate memory, and it does so with GFP_KERNEL.
> You can't do that with a spinlock held.

Looks like we'll either have to introduce a per-mm semaphore for
the same_vma anon_vma chains, or move the complexity of solving
this bug to anon_vma_merge, where we can ensure that the resulting
VMA has the sum of the anon_vmas of each VMA.
--
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/