[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7ec6fa37-8529-183d-d467-df3642bcbfd2@netapp.com>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 22:37:38 +0300
From: Boaz Harrosh <boazh@...app.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
CC: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, <x86@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>,
Amit Golander <Amit.Golander@...app.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Add new vma flag VM_LOCAL_CPU
On 14/05/18 22:15, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 08:28:01PM +0300, Boaz Harrosh wrote:
>> On a call to mmap an mmap provider (like an FS) can put
>> this flag on vma->vm_flags.
>>
>> The VM_LOCAL_CPU flag tells the Kernel that the vma will be used
>> from a single-core only, and therefore invalidation (flush_tlb) of
>> PTE(s) need not be a wide CPU scheduling.
>
> I still don't get this. You're opening the kernel up to being exploited
> by any application which can persuade it to set this flag on a VMA.
>
No No this is not an application accessible flag this can only be set
by the mmap implementor at ->mmap() time (Say same as VM_VM_MIXEDMAP).
Please see the zuf patches for usage (Again apologise for pushing before
a user)
The mmap provider has all the facilities to know that this can not be
abused, not even by a trusted Server.
>> NOTE: This vma (VM_LOCAL_CPU) is never used during a page_fault. It is
>> always used in a synchronous way from a thread pinned to a single core.
>
> It's not a question of how your app is going to use this flag. It's a
> question about how another app can abuse this flag (or how your app is
> going to be exploited to abuse this flag) to break into the kernel.
>
If you look at the zuf user you will see that the faults all return
SIG_BUS. These can never fault. The server has access to this mapping
from a single thread pinned to a core.
Again it is not an app visible flag in anyway
Thanks for looking
Boaz
Powered by blists - more mailing lists