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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 01:28:02 +0100 From: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> Cc: Eric Paris <eparis@...isplace.org>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ibm.com>, linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: fix IMA lockdep circular locking dependency On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 03:51:27PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > > > The only difference is that for file-backed ones !MMU wants > > VM_MAYEXEC in that file's bdi flags (BDI_CAP_EXEC_MAP). ?And > > that actually sounds reasonable in !MMU case. > > Ok, I don't think it should be strictly necessary, but I guess I don't > mind either. > > > Anyway, I've dumped the variant I've got into vfs.git@...urity_file_mmap; > > it should be at commit f12a0fd062b1d259a0b6bc6442019e6d4c45e9f5. > > > > Comments? > > Two small ones: > > - I really don't think you should use "goto out" in > security_mmap_file(). That implies that you're exiting the function, > but in fact you're jumping to the very *meat* of the function. > > So I think you should rename "out" as "no_added_exec" or something. FWIW, I think it's cleaner to take the whole thing into an inlined helper. > And a small question: This code: > > + ret = security_mmap_file(file, prot, flags); > + if (!ret) { > + down_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem); > + retval = do_mmap_pgoff(file, addr, len, prot, flags, pgoff); > + up_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem); > + } > > now seems to exist in four places. And in fact, that pretty much seems > to *be* what vm_mmap() is, at this point. Why isn't there just one > single vm_mmap() implementation, and then the callers of that? Umm... Not quite. The difference is that vm_mmap() takes its argument as offset in bytes, while sys_mmap_pgoff() - in pages. It can be reorganized a bit, though. vm_mmap() aside, there are only two callers of do_mmap(), both passing it 0 as the last argument. So let's lift these checks on offset into vm_mmap() and kill do_mmap() completely - all that remains of it would be a call of do_mmap_pgoff(). And there's no reason to put those sanity checks (now in vm_mmap()) under ->mmap_sem, of course. At that point we *do* get 4 identical pieces of code. Let's call that vm_mmap_pgoff() and put it (and vm_mmap()) to mm/util.c. Voila... I've pushed that to the same place (vfs.git#security_file_mmap). Should propagate to git.kernel.org in a few... Guys, does anybody have objections about the way it looks? -- 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