linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/1] selftest/mm/hugetlb: SIGBUS on stolen 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: Fri, 5 Jan 2024 08:42:38 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: riel@...riel.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, vegard.nossum@...cle.com,
 rppt@...nel.org, songmuchun@...edance.com, shy828301@...il.com,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] selftest/mm/hugetlb: SIGBUS on stolen page

On Fri,  5 Jan 2024 07:54:18 -0800 Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org> wrote:

> This test case triggers a race between madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) and
> mmap() in a single huge page, which got stolen (while reserved).
> 
> Once the only page is stolen, the memory previously mmaped (and
> madvise(MADV_DONTNEED) got a SIGBUS when accessed.
> 
> I am not adding this test to the un_vmtests.sh scripts, since this test
> fails at upstream.

Oh.  Is a fix for this in the pipeline?  If so, I assume that once the
fix is merged, we enable this test in run_vmtests?