| 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: <20150413142655.GA14646@node.dhcp.inet.fi>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2015 17:26:55 +0300
From: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
To: Laurent Dufour <ldufour@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>,
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 Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 04:11:19PM +0200, Laurent Dufour wrote:
> 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 ?
Acked-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
--
Kirill A. Shutemov
--
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