| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20090205104735.ECDA.KOSAKI.MOTOHIRO@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 11:03:09 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Ravikiran G Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, wli@...ementarian.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
shai@...lex86.org, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch] mm: Fix SHM_HUGETLB to work with users in hugetlb_shm_group
(cc to Mel and Nishanth)
I think this requirement is reasonable. but I also hope Mel or Nishanth
review this.
<<intentionally full quote>>
> On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 05:11:21PM -0500, wli@...ementarian.org wrote:
> >On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 02:04:28PM -0800, Ravikiran G Thirumalai wrote:
> >> ...
> >> As I see it we have the following options to fix this inconsistency:
> >> 1. Do not depend on RLIMIT_MEMLOCK for hugetlb shm mappings. If a user
> >> has CAP_IPC_LOCK or if user belongs to /proc/sys/vm/hugetlb_shm_group,
> >> he should be able to use shm memory according to shmmax and shmall OR
> >> 2. Update the hugetlbpage documentation to mention the resource limit based
> >> limitation, and remove the useless /proc/sys/vm/hugetlb_shm_group sysctl
> >> Which one is better? I am leaning towards 1. and have a patch ready for 1.
> >> but I might be missing some historical reason for using RLIMIT_MEMLOCK with
> >> SHM_HUGETLB.
> >
> >We should do (1) because the hugetlb_shm_group and CAP_IPC_LOCK bits
> >should both continue to work as they did prior to RLIMIT_MEMLOCK -based
> >management of hugetlb. Please make sure the new RLIMIT_MEMLOCK -based
> >management still enables hugetlb shm when hugetlb_shm_group and
> >CAP_IPC_LOCK don't apply.
> >
>
> OK, here's the patch.
>
> Thanks,
> Kiran
>
>
> Fix hugetlb subsystem so that non root users belonging to hugetlb_shm_group
> can actually allocate hugetlb backed shm.
>
> Currently non root users cannot even map one large page using SHM_HUGETLB
> when they belong to the gid in /proc/sys/vm/hugetlb_shm_group.
> This is because allocation size is verified against RLIMIT_MEMLOCK resource
> limit even if the user belongs to hugetlb_shm_group.
>
> This patch
> 1. Fixes hugetlb subsystem so that users with CAP_IPC_LOCK and users
> belonging to hugetlb_shm_group don't need to be restricted with
> RLIMIT_MEMLOCK resource limits
> 2. If a user has sufficient memlock limit he can still allocate the hugetlb
> shm segment.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ravikiran Thirumalai <kiran@...lex86.org>
>
> ---
>
> Documentation/vm/hugetlbpage.txt | 11 ++++++-----
> fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
> include/linux/mm.h | 2 ++
> mm/mlock.c | 11 ++++++++---
> 4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6-tip/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c 2009-02-04 15:21:45.000000000 -0800
> +++ linux-2.6-tip/fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c 2009-02-04 15:23:19.000000000 -0800
> @@ -943,8 +943,15 @@ static struct vfsmount *hugetlbfs_vfsmou
> static int can_do_hugetlb_shm(void)
> {
> return likely(capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK) ||
> - in_group_p(sysctl_hugetlb_shm_group) ||
> - can_do_mlock());
> + in_group_p(sysctl_hugetlb_shm_group));
> +}
> +
> +static void acct_huge_shm_lock(size_t size, struct user_struct *user)
> +{
> + unsigned long pages = (size + PAGE_SIZE - 1) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> + spin_lock(&shmlock_user_lock);
> + acct_shm_lock(pages, user);
> + spin_unlock(&shmlock_user_lock);
> }
>
> struct file *hugetlb_file_setup(const char *name, size_t size)
> @@ -959,12 +966,11 @@ struct file *hugetlb_file_setup(const ch
> if (!hugetlbfs_vfsmount)
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT);
>
> - if (!can_do_hugetlb_shm())
> + if (can_do_hugetlb_shm())
> + acct_huge_shm_lock(size, user);
> + else if (!user_shm_lock(size, user))
> return ERR_PTR(-EPERM);
>
> - if (!user_shm_lock(size, user))
> - return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> -
> root = hugetlbfs_vfsmount->mnt_root;
> quick_string.name = name;
> quick_string.len = strlen(quick_string.name);
> Index: linux-2.6-tip/include/linux/mm.h
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/include/linux/mm.h 2009-02-04 15:21:45.000000000 -0800
> +++ linux-2.6-tip/include/linux/mm.h 2009-02-04 15:23:19.000000000 -0800
> @@ -737,8 +737,10 @@ extern unsigned long shmem_get_unmapped_
> #endif
>
> extern int can_do_mlock(void);
> +extern void acct_shm_lock(unsigned long, struct user_struct *);
> extern int user_shm_lock(size_t, struct user_struct *);
> extern void user_shm_unlock(size_t, struct user_struct *);
> +extern spinlock_t shmlock_user_lock;
>
> /*
> * Parameter block passed down to zap_pte_range in exceptional cases.
> Index: linux-2.6-tip/mm/mlock.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/mm/mlock.c 2009-02-04 15:21:45.000000000 -0800
> +++ linux-2.6-tip/mm/mlock.c 2009-02-04 15:23:19.000000000 -0800
> @@ -637,7 +637,13 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE0(munlockall)
> * Objects with different lifetime than processes (SHM_LOCK and SHM_HUGETLB
> * shm segments) get accounted against the user_struct instead.
> */
> -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(shmlock_user_lock);
> +DEFINE_SPINLOCK(shmlock_user_lock);
> +
> +void acct_shm_lock(unsigned long pages, struct user_struct *user)
> +{
> + get_uid(user);
> + user->locked_shm += pages;
> +}
>
> int user_shm_lock(size_t size, struct user_struct *user)
> {
> @@ -653,8 +659,7 @@ int user_shm_lock(size_t size, struct us
> if (!allowed &&
> locked + user->locked_shm > lock_limit && !capable(CAP_IPC_LOCK))
> goto out;
> - get_uid(user);
> - user->locked_shm += locked;
> + acct_shm_lock(locked, user);
> allowed = 1;
> out:
> spin_unlock(&shmlock_user_lock);
> Index: linux-2.6-tip/Documentation/vm/hugetlbpage.txt
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/Documentation/vm/hugetlbpage.txt 2009-02-04 15:21:45.000000000 -0800
> +++ linux-2.6-tip/Documentation/vm/hugetlbpage.txt 2009-02-04 15:23:19.000000000 -0800
> @@ -147,11 +147,12 @@ used to change the file attributes on hu
>
> Also, it is important to note that no such mount command is required if the
> applications are going to use only shmat/shmget system calls. Users who
> -wish to use hugetlb page via shared memory segment should be a member of
> -a supplementary group and system admin needs to configure that gid into
> -/proc/sys/vm/hugetlb_shm_group. It is possible for same or different
> -applications to use any combination of mmaps and shm* calls, though the
> -mount of filesystem will be required for using mmap calls.
> +wish to use hugetlb page via shared memory segment should either have
> +sufficient memlock resource limits or, they need to be a member of
> +a supplementary group, and system admin needs to configure that gid into
> +/proc/sys/vm/hugetlb_shm_group. It is possible for same or different
> +applications to use any combination of mmaps and shm* calls, though
> +the mount of filesystem will be required for using mmap calls.
>
> *******************************************************************
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
> the body to majordomo@...ck.org. For more info on Linux MM,
> see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
> Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@...ck.org"> email@...ck.org </a>
--
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