| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <552BCE87.8040103@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 16:11:19 +0200
From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
cov@...eaurora.org, criu@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v3 1/2] mm: Introducing arch_remap hook
On 13/04/2015 16:02, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 04:35:21PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> On 04/13/2015 04:21 PM, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>>> On 13/04/2015 15:13, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 02:41:22PM +0200, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>>>>> On 13/04/2015 13:58, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 11:56:27AM +0200, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>>>>>>> Some architecture would like to be triggered when a memory area is moved
>>>>>>> through the mremap system call.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This patch is introducing a new arch_remap mm hook which is placed in the
>>>>>>> path of mremap, and is called before the old area is unmapped (and the
>>>>>>> arch_unmap hook is called).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The architectures which need to call this hook should define
>>>>>>> __HAVE_ARCH_REMAP in their asm/mmu_context.h and provide the arch_remap
>>>>>>> service with the following prototype:
>>>>>>> void arch_remap(struct mm_struct *mm,
>>>>>>> unsigned long old_start, unsigned long old_end,
>>>>>>> unsigned long new_start, unsigned long new_end);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> mm/mremap.c | 19 +++++++++++++------
>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c
>>>>>>> index 2dc44b1cb1df..009db5565893 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/mm/mremap.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/mm/mremap.c
>>>>>>> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #include <asm/cacheflush.h>
>>>>>>> #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
>>>>>>> +#include <asm/mmu_context.h>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #include "internal.h"
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -286,13 +287,19 @@ static unsigned long move_vma(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>>>>> old_len = new_len;
>>>>>>> old_addr = new_addr;
>>>>>>> new_addr = -ENOMEM;
>>>>>>> - } else if (vma->vm_file && vma->vm_file->f_op->mremap) {
>>>>>>> - err = vma->vm_file->f_op->mremap(vma->vm_file, new_vma);
>>>>>>> - if (err < 0) {
>>>>>>> - move_page_tables(new_vma, new_addr, vma, old_addr,
>>>>>>> - moved_len, true);
>>>>>>> - return err;
>>>>>>> + } else {
>>>>>>> + if (vma->vm_file && vma->vm_file->f_op->mremap) {
>>>>>>> + err = vma->vm_file->f_op->mremap(vma->vm_file, new_vma);
>>>>>>> + if (err < 0) {
>>>>>>> + move_page_tables(new_vma, new_addr, vma,
>>>>>>> + old_addr, moved_len, true);
>>>>>>> + return err;
>>>>>>> + }
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> +#ifdef __HAVE_ARCH_REMAP
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It would be cleaner to provide dummy arch_remap() for !__HAVE_ARCH_REMAP
>>>>>> in some generic header.
>>>>>
>>>>> The idea was to not impact all the architectures as arch_unmap(),
>>>>> arch_dup_mmap() or arch_exit_mmap() implies.
>>>>>
>>>>> I look at the headers where such a dummy arch_remap could be put but I
>>>>> can't figure out one which will not impact all the architecture.
>>>>> What about defining a dummy service earlier in mm/remap.c in the case
>>>>> __HAVE_ARCH_REMAP is not defined ?
>>>>> Something like :
>>>>> #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_REMAP
>>>>> static inline void void arch_remap(struct mm_struct *mm,
>>>>> unsigned long old_start,
>>>>> unsigned long old_end,
>>>>> unsigned long new_start,
>>>>> unsigned long new_end)
>>>>> {
>>>>> }
>>>>> #endif
>>>>
>>>> Or just #define arch_remap(...) do { } while (0)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I guessed you wanted the arch_remap() prototype to be exposed somewhere
>>> in the code.
>>>
>>> To be honest, I can't find the benefit of defining a dummy arch_remap()
>>> in mm/remap.c if __HAVE_ARCH_REMAP is not defined instead of calling it
>>> in move_vma if __HAVE_ARCH_REMAP is defined.
>>> Is it really what you want ?
>>
>> I think Kirill meant something like e.g. the arch_enter_lazy_mmu_mode()
>> is implemented and called in mm/mremap.c -- the "generic" part is in the
>> include/asm-generic/pgtable.h and those architectures willing to have
>> their own implementation are in arch/$arch/...
>>
>> Kirill, if I'm right with it, can you suggest the header where to put
>> the "generic" mremap hook's (empty) body?
>
> I initially thought it would be enough to put it into
> <asm-generic/mmu_context.h>, expecting it works as
> <asm-generic/pgtable.h>. But that's not the case.
>
> It probably worth at some point rework all <asm/mmu_context.h> to include
> <asm-generic/mmu_context.h> at the end as we do for <asm/pgtable.h>.
> But that's outside the scope of the patchset, I guess.
>
> I don't see any better candidate for such dummy header. :-/
Clearly, I'm not confortable with a rewrite of <asm/mmu_context.h> :(
So what about this patch, is this v3 acceptable ?
Cheers,
Laurent.
--
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