linux-kernel - Re: PROBLEM: kernel BUG at drivers/gpu/drm/drm

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200901300855.18622.jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>
Date:	Fri, 30 Jan 2009 08:55:17 -0800
From:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>
To:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:	Thomas Hellström <thomas@...pmail.org>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kerolasa@....fi, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...net.be>,
	Dickins <hugh@...itas.com>, dri-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	kerolasa@...il.com
Subject: Re: PROBLEM: kernel BUG at drivers/gpu/drm/drm_fops.c:146!

On Friday, January 30, 2009 1:21 am Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:13:55 +0100 Thomas Hellstr__m <thomas@...pmail.org> 
wrote:
> > >> Sounds right to me.  The offsets are just handles, not real file
> > >> objects or backing store addresses.  We use them to take advantage of
> > >> all the inode address mapping helpers, since they track stuff for us.
> > >>
> > >> That said, unmap_mapping_range may not be the best way to do this;
> > >> basically we need a way to invalidate a given processes' mapping of a
> > >> GTT range (which in turn is backed by real RAM).  If there's some
> > >> other way we should be doing this I'm all ears.
> > >
> > > Well, we'd need to call in the big guns on this one - I've already
> > > stirred Hugh ;)
> > >
> > > unmap_mapping_range() is basically a truncate thing - it shoots down
> > > all mappings of a range of a *file*.  Across all processes in the
> > > machine which map that file.
> > >
> > > If that isn't what you want to do (and it sounds that way) then you'd
> > > want to use something which is mm_struct (or vma) centric, rather than
> > > file-centric.  zap_page_range(), methinks.
> >
> > I guess I was the one starting to use this function, so some explanation:
> >
> > When the drm device is used to provide address space for buffers,
> > user-space actually see it as a file with a distinct offset where
> > buffers are laid out in a linear fashion, To access a certain buffer you
> > need to lseek() to the correct offset and then read() write() or, the
> > more common use, mmap / munmap.
> >
> > When looking through its implementation, unmap_mapping_range() seemed to
> > do exactly the thing I wanted, namely to kill all user-space mappings of
> > all vmas of all processes mapping a part of the device address space.
>
> That's different from what Jesse said.  That _is_ a more appropriate
> use of unmap_mapping_range().  Although all the futzing that function
> does with truncate_count is now looking inappropriately-placed.

Yeah I misspoke, we do need to blow away *all* the mappings, not just the ones 
for a given process (since the backing GTT mapping is gone/moved).  We could 
probably use zap_page_range, but might have to do a bit more work in the 
driver if we did.

-- 
Jesse Barnes, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
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/