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:	Mon, 06 Jun 2011 10:56:13 -0700
From:	Darren Hart <dvhart@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	David Oliver <david@...advisors.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Shawn Bohrer <sbohrer@...advisors.com>,
	Zachary Vonler <zvonler@...advisors.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: Change in functionality of futex() system call.



On 06/06/2011 10:27 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:11:37PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> Le lundi 06 juin 2011 à 19:05 +0200, Peter Zijlstra a écrit :
>>
>>> Dunno, using futexes on private file maps is stupid imo, its just asking
>>> for trouble, ro private file maps are even worse. Forcing the COW is the
>>> only sane answer in that it gives consistent results and 'breaks' silly
>>> expectations early instead of sometimes.
>>>
>>> Anyway, that's not really the issue here, as David uses MAP_SHARED (as
>>> one should if one is interested in the shared value).
>>
>> Sure, but maybe another guy is 'stupid' and uses MAP_PRIVATE on its
>> read-only mappings. With old kernels this was working, and we were not
>> doing the COW.
> 
> That sounds like a bug in both the kernel and userspace. I would expect
> a MAP_PRIVATE not be seen by any other process regardless. That's the
> definition of PRIVATE.
> 
>  From: http://www.gnu.org/s/hello/manual/libc/Memory_002dmapped-I_002fO.html
> 
> MAP_PRIVATE
>     This specifies that writes to the region should never be written back
>     to the attached file. Instead, a copy is made for the process, and the
>     region will be swapped normally if memory runs low. No other process
>     will see the changes. 


This doesn't address what happens if changes to a MAP_SHARED mapping are
visible to a MAP_PRIVATE mapping, which is more the issue at hand I believe.

-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel
--
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/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ