[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171113120057.555mvrs4fjq5tyng@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 13:00:57 +0100
From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>
Cc: Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Abdul Haleem <abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Yoshinori Sato <ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Chris Zankel <chris@...kel.net>,
Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@...ux-xtensa.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: Tree for Nov 7
On Mon 13-11-17 22:34:50, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hi Michal,
>
> Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> writes:
> > On Mon 13-11-17 10:20:06, Michal Hocko wrote:
> >> [Cc arm and ppc maintainers]
> >
> > Hmm, it turned out to be a problem on other architectures as well.
> > CCing more maintainers. For your reference, we are talking about
> > http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20171023082608.6167-1-mhocko@kernel.org
> > which has broken architectures which do apply aligning on the mmap
> > address hint without MAP_FIXED applied. See below my proposed way
> > around this issue because I belive that the above patch is quite
> > valuable on its own to be dropped for all archs.
>
> I don't really like your solution sorry :) The fact that you've had to
> patch seven arches seems like a red flag.
>
> I think this is a generic problem with MAP_FIXED, which I've heard
> userspace folks complain about in the past.
The thing is that we canno change MAP_FIXED behavior as it is carved in
stone
> Currently MAP_FIXED does two things:
> 1. makes addr not a hint but the required address
> 2. blasts any existing mapping
>
> You want 1) but not 2).
+ fail if there is a clashing range
> So the right solution IMHO would be to add a new mmap flag to request
> that behaviour, ie. a fixed address but iff there is nothing already
> mapped there.
>
> I don't know the mm code well enough to know if that's hard for some
> reason, but it *seems* like it should be doable.
Yes, I have mentioned that in the previous email but the amount of code
would be even larger. Basically every arch which reimplements
arch_get_unmapped_area would have to special case new MAP_FIXED flag to
do vma lookup. So this was the most simple solution I could come up
with. If there was a general interest for MAP_FIXED_SAFE then we can
introduce it later of course. I would just like the hardening merged
sooner rather than later.
--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists