linux-kernel - Re: [v2 PATCH] mm: introduce arg_lock to protect arg_start|end and env_start|end in mm

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <def25632-b983-950b-d2e6-b7c6478024ed@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Mar 2018 17:20:33 -0400
From:   Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
        Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc:     adobriyan@...il.com, mhocko@...nel.org, mguzik@...hat.com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH] mm: introduce arg_lock to protect arg_start|end and
 env_start|end in mm_struct



On 3/26/18 5:10 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> On 2018/03/27 4:21, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>> That said I think using read-lock here would be a bug.
> If I understand correctly, the caller can't set both fields atomically, for
> prctl() does not receive both fields at one call.
>
>    prctl(PR_SET_MM, PR_SET_MM_ARG_START xor PR_SET_MM_ARG_END xor PR_SET_MM_ENV_START xor PR_SET_MM_ENV_END, new value, 0, 0);
>
> Then, I wonder whether reading arg_start|end and env_start|end atomically makes
> sense. Just retry reading if arg_start > env_end or env_start > env_end is fine?

It might trap into dead loop if those are set to wrong values, right?