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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 11:57:27 -0800 From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org> Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>, Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@...cle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Abdul Haleem <abdhalee@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mm: introduce MAP_FIXED_SAFE On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 11:14:27AM -0800, Kees Cook wrote: > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 9:46 PM, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote: > > Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org> writes: > >> So, just like we currently say "exactly one of MAP_SHARED or MAP_PRIVATE", > >> we could add a new paragraph saying "at most one of MAP_FIXED or > >> MAP_REQUIRED" and "any of the following values". > > > > MAP_REQUIRED doesn't immediately grab me, but I don't actively dislike > > it either :) > > > > What about MAP_AT_ADDR ? > > > > It's short, and says what it does on the tin. The first argument to mmap > > is actually called "addr" too. > > "FIXED" is supposed to do this too. > > Pavel suggested: > > MAP_ADD_FIXED > > (which is different from "use fixed", and describes why it would fail: > can't add since it already exists.) > > Perhaps "MAP_FIXED_NEW"? > > There has been a request to drop "FIXED" from the name, so these: > > MAP_FIXED_NOCLOBBER > MAP_FIXED_NOREPLACE > MAP_FIXED_ADD > MAP_FIXED_NEW > > Could be: > > MAP_NOCLOBBER > MAP_NOREPLACE > MAP_ADD > MAP_NEW > > and we still have the unloved, but acceptable: > > MAP_REQUIRED > > My vote is still for "NOREPLACE" or "NOCLOBBER" since it's very > specific, though "NEW" is pretty clear too. How about MAP_NOFORCE?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists