linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH, RFC] xip: use i_mutex for xip_file

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:	Sun, 11 Sep 2011 12:15:04 +0100
From:	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
To:	Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>
Cc:	Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] xip: use i_mutex for xip_file_fault

On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 10:25:03AM +0200, Marco Stornelli wrote:
> Il 10/09/2011 17:56, Al Viro ha scritto:
> >On Sat, Sep 10, 2011 at 05:31:39PM +0200, Marco Stornelli wrote:
> >>From: Marco Stornelli<marco.stornelli@...il.com>
> >>
> >>There aren't sufficient sync points for a fs for xip operations. In
> >>particular for the mmap case. It can be not sufficient to lock/unlock
> >>to do some operation inside get_xip_mem callback. For xip_file_read
> >>it's really easy to write a fs specific wrapper, xip_file_write hold
> >>i_mutex so no problem. With this patch we can avoid concurrent truncate
> >>operation and xip mmap.
> >
> >Umm...  I really don't like that; what's going to happen if you have a file
> >mmapped and do write() to that file from address in that mapping?
> >
> 
> Nothing strange. There is a serialization of the operations. Maybe I
> don't understand the point here.

write() grabs ->i_mutex on the file it's going to write to.  It uses
copy_from_user() while holding ->i_mutex; that can end up calling ->fault().
If your data comes from the same file mmapped in your address space, you
have xip_write_fault() called while you are in xip_file_write() and *already*
are holding ->i_mutex on the same inode.  With your patch it will, AFAICS,
cheerfully deadlock.

--
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/