[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120601183844.GB31771@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 20:38:44 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Anton Arapov <anton@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] uprobes: install_breakpoint() should fail if
is_swbp_insn() == T
On 06/01, Srikar Dronamraju wrote:
>
> * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com> [2012-05-31 20:53:39]:
>
> > __find_next_vma_info() checks tmpvi->mm == vma->vm_mm to detect the
> > already visited mm/vma. However, afaics this can be false positive?
> >
> > The caller, register_for_each_vma(), does mmput() and after that
> > this memory can be freed and re-used as another mm_struct.
> >
>
> Before we do a mmput(), we take the mmap_sem for that mm. So this mm
> cannot be freed until we complete insertion/removal. If the mm gets
> reused after the insertion/removal, and maps the inode,
Yes, see the previous email from me, we can rely on uprobe_mmap().
> Or are you hinting at some other problem?
Perhaps this deserves a comment. I mean, to explain that yes,
tmpvi->mm == vma->vm_mm can be wrong but this is fine.
However, I hope we simply can kill this code. See build_map_info()
I sent.
Oleg.
--
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