[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BANLkTinenKYRUtfif_LEXhZByYkKD95UNw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 21:18:47 +0200
From: Robert Święcki <robert@...ecki.net>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] __mlock_vma_pages_range: stack_guard_page() case
returns the wrong value
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:08 PM, Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> wrote:
> __mlock_vma_pages_range() simply changes addr/nr_pages when
> stack_guard_page(vma, start). But this means that __get_user_pages()
> returns a number which doesn't match the [start, end) interval and
> the caller can be confused.
>
> If we skip the first page, we should return 1 if gup fails, or add
> 1 to the number it returns.
>
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
> ---
>
> mm/mlock.c | 16 ++++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> --- sigprocmask/mm/mlock.c~do_mlock_pages_stack_guard_page 2011-04-06 21:33:50.000000000 +0200
> +++ sigprocmask/mm/mlock.c 2011-04-12 20:50:30.000000000 +0200
> @@ -159,9 +159,8 @@ static long __mlock_vma_pages_range(stru
> int *nonblocking)
> {
> struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm;
> - unsigned long addr = start;
> int nr_pages = (end - start) / PAGE_SIZE;
> - int gup_flags;
> + int gup_flags, skip_page, ret;
>
> VM_BUG_ON(start & ~PAGE_MASK);
> VM_BUG_ON(end & ~PAGE_MASK);
> @@ -189,13 +188,22 @@ static long __mlock_vma_pages_range(stru
> gup_flags |= FOLL_MLOCK;
>
> /* We don't try to access the guard page of a stack vma */
> + skip_page = 0;
> if (stack_guard_page(vma, start)) {
> - addr += PAGE_SIZE;
> + skip_page = 1;
> + start += PAGE_SIZE;
> nr_pages--;
> }
>
> - return __get_user_pages(current, mm, addr, nr_pages, gup_flags,
> + ret = __get_user_pages(current, mm, start, nr_pages, gup_flags,
> NULL, NULL, nonblocking);
> +
> + if (ret >= 0)
> + ret += skip_page;
> + else if (skip_page)
> + ret = 1;
> +
> + return ret;
> }
>
> /*
Compiling with Linus' new patch now, lemme know if you agree on which
one might be the more correct one :). Otherwise I'll stick to the
first choice, and let you know tomorrow if it worked some more
extensive testing.
--
Robert Święcki
--
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