[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170705141849.2e0e4721d975277183eb178f@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 14:18:49 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: mm, mmap: do not blow on PROT_NONE MAP_FIXED holes
in the stack
On Wed, 5 Jul 2017 20:28:49 +0200 Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> wrote:
> "mm: enlarge stack guard gap" has introduced a regression in some rust
> and Java environments which are trying to implement their own stack
> guard page. They are punching a new MAP_FIXED mapping inside the
> existing stack Vma.
>
> This will confuse expand_{downwards,upwards} into thinking that the stack
> expansion would in fact get us too close to an existing non-stack vma
> which is a correct behavior wrt. safety. It is a real regression on
> the other hand. Let's work around the problem by considering PROT_NONE
> mapping as a part of the stack. This is a gros hack but overflowing to
> such a mapping would trap anyway an we only can hope that usespace
> knows what it is doing and handle it propely.
>
> Fixes: d4d2d35e6ef9 ("mm: larger stack guard gap, between vmas")
That should be 1be7107fbe18, yes?
> Debugged-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists