[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8ff61433-f154-6c9e-91b2-1857b5eff90c@virtuozzo.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2017 20:52:59 +0300
From: Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@...tuozzo.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andrey Vagin <avagin@...nvz.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...tuozzo.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...uxfoundation.org>,
Adrian Reber <areber@...hat.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk@...7.org>
Subject: Re: [criu] 1M guard page ruined restore
On 06/21/2017 08:31 PM, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 06/21, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
>>
>> The only question I have - how is it connected to guard page?
>
> Because with stack guard page do_page_fault() almost never needs to
> call expand_stack(), thus this check was almost never tested, I guess.
> Probably it should go away now.
>
> I'll write the changelog and patch tomorrow, unless someone does this
> before.
Ugh, maybe it's also worth now to update man 2 mmap.
At this moment, mmap() will no more return address one page lower
and "guard" is no more a page:
> MAP_GROWSDOWN
> This flag is used for stacks. It indicates to the kernel virtual
> memory system that the mapping should extend downward in
> memory. The return address is one page lower than the memory
> area that is actually created in the process's virtual address
> space. Touching an address in the "guard" page below the mapping
> will cause the mapping to grow by a page. This growth can be
> repeated until the mapping grows to within a page of the high end
> of the next lower mapping, at which point touching the "guard"
> page will result in a SIGSEGV signal.
CC'ing Michael
--
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists