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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Wed, 30 Aug 2017 09:18:59 +0530
From:   Anshuman Khandual <>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <>,
        Laurent Dufour <>
Cc:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <>,,,,,,, Matthew Wilcox <>,,,,
        Thomas Gleixner <>,
        Ingo Molnar <>,,
        Will Deacon <>,,,,,,,
        Tim Chen <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 14/20] mm: Provide speculative fault infrastructure

On 08/29/2017 05:34 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 09:59:30AM +0200, Laurent Dufour wrote:
>> On 27/08/2017 02:18, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (unlikely(!vma->anon_vma))
>>>> +		goto unlock;
>>> It deserves a comment.
>> You're right I'll add it in the next version.
>> For the record, the root cause is that __anon_vma_prepare() requires the
>> mmap_sem to be held because vm_next and vm_prev must be safe.
> But should that test not be:
> 	if (unlikely(vma_is_anonymous(vma) && !vma->anon_vma))
> 		goto unlock;

This makes more sense. We are backing off from speculative path
because struct anon_vma has not been created for this anonymous
vma and we cannot do that without holding mmap_sem. This should
have nothing to do with vma->vm_ops availability.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists