linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 15/18] uprobes: wait for mmap

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, 29 Feb 2016 18:12:11 +0100
From:	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@....com>,
	Alex Thorlton <athorlton@....com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
	Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
	Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
	"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
	Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>,
	linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Petr Cermak <petrcermak@...omium.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/18] uprobes: wait for mmap_sem for write killable

On 02/29, Michal Hocko wrote:
>
> Ahh, I see. I didn't understand what is the purpose of the warning. Does
> the following work for you?
> ---
> diff --git a/kernel/events/uprobes.c b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> index a79315d0f711..fb4a6bcc88ce 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/uprobes.c
> @@ -1470,7 +1470,8 @@ static void dup_xol_work(struct callback_head *work)
>  	if (current->flags & PF_EXITING)
>  		return;
>
> -	if (!__create_xol_area(current->utask->dup_xol_addr))
> +	if (!__create_xol_area(current->utask->dup_xol_addr) &&
> +			!fatal_signal_pending(current)
>  		uprobe_warn(current, "dup xol area");
>  }

Yes, I think this is fine.

Probably deserves a cleanup, but we can do it later.

Oleg.