linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: introduce MAP_FIXED

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:   Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:57:34 -0800
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
To:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Cc:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>,
        Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
        Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Abdul Haleem <abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: introduce MAP_FIXED_SAFE

On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:13:31PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 8, 2017 at 12:33 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> > OK, this doesn't seem to lead to anywhere. The more this is discussed
> > the more names we are getting. So you know what? I will resubmit and
> > keep my original name. If somebody really hates it then feel free to
> > nack the patch and push alternative and gain concensus on it.
> >
> > I will keep MAP_FIXED_SAFE because it is an alternative to MAP_FIXED so
> > having that in the name is _useful_ for everybody familiar with
> > MAP_FIXED already. And _SAFE suffix tells that the operation doesn't
> > cause any silent memory corruptions or other unexpected side effects.
> 
> Looks like consensus is MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE.

I'd rather MAP_AT_ADDR or MAP_REQUIRED, but I prefer FIXED_NOREPLACE to
FIXED_SAFE.

I just had a thought though -- MAP_STATIC?  ie don't move it.