linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mremap: enforce rmap src/dst vma ordering in case of vma_merge succeeding in copy

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20111116140042.GD3306@redhat.com>
Date:	Wed, 16 Nov 2011 15:00:42 +0100
From:	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc:	Nai Xia <nai.xia@...il.com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
	Pawel Sikora <pluto@...k.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	jpiszcz@...idpixels.com, arekm@...-linux.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mremap: enforce rmap src/dst vma ordering in case of
 vma_merge succeeding in copy_vma

On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 02:25:42AM +0100, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> Also note, if we find a way to enforce orderings in the prio tree (not
> sure if it's possible, apparently it's already using list_add_tail
> so..), then we could also remove the i_mmap_lock from mremap and fork.

I'm not optimistic we can enforce ordering there. Being a tree it's
walked in range order.

I thought of another solution that would avoid having to reorder the
list in mremap and avoid the i_mmap_mutex to be added to fork (and
then we can remove it from mremap too). The solution is to rmap_walk
twice. I mean two loops over the same_anon_vma for those rmap walks
that must be reliable (that includes two calls of
unmap_mapping_range). For both same_anon_vma and prio tree.

Reading truncate_pagecache I see two loops already and a comment
saying it's for fork(), to avoid leaking ptes in the child. So fork is
probably ok already without having to take the i_mmap_mutex, but then
I wonder why that also doesn't fix mremap if we do two loops there and
why that i_mmap_mutex is really needed in mremap considering those two
calls already present in truncate_pagecache. I wonder if that was a
"theoretical" fix that missed the fact truncate already walks the prio
tree twice, so it doesn't matter if the rmap_walk goes in the opposite
direction of move_page_tables? That i_mmap_lock in mremap (now
i_mmap_mutex) is there since start of git history. The double loop was
introduced in d00806b183152af6d24f46f0c33f14162ca1262a. So it's very
possible that i_mmap_mutex is now useless (after
d00806b183152af6d24f46f0c33f14162ca1262a) and the fix for fork, was
already taking care of mremap too and that i_mmap_mutex can now be
removed.
--
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/