linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: fix possible cause of a page

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, 4 May 2011 20:37:52 -0700
From:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc:	Robert Święcki <robert@...ecki.net>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix possible cause of a page_mapped BUG

Ok, so here's a slightly different approach.

It still makes the FOLL_MLOCK be unconditional in the mlock path, but
it really just pushes down the

-       gup_flags = FOLL_TOUCH;
+       gup_flags = FOLL_TOUCH | FOLL_MLOCK;
        ...
-       if (vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED)
-               gup_flags |= FOLL_MLOCK;

from __mlock_vma_pages_range(), and moves the conditional into
'follow_page()' (which is the only _user_ of that flag) instead:

-       if (flags & FOLL_MLOCK) {
+       if ((flags & FOLL_MLOCK) && (vma->vm_flags & VM_LOCKED)) {

so semantically this changes nothing at all.

But now, because __get_user_pages() can look at FOLL_MLOCK to see that
it's a mlock access, we can do that whole "skip stack guard page"
based on that flag:

-               if (!pages && stack_guard_page(vma, start))
+               if ((gup_flags & FOLL_MLOCK) && stack_guard_page(vma, start))

which means that other uses will try to page in the stack guard page.

I seriously considered making that "skip stack guard page" and the
"mlock lookup" be two separate bits, because conceptually they are
really pretty independent, but right now the only _users_ seem to be
tied together, so I kept it as one single bit (FOLL_MLOCK).

But as far as I can tell, the attached patch is 100% equivalent to
what we do now, except for that "skip stack guard pages only for
mlock" change.

Comments? I like this patch because it seems to make the logic more
straightforward.

But somebody else should double-check my logic.

                         Linus

View attachment "patch.diff" of type "text/x-patch" (1728 bytes)