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  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:   Tue, 22 Jan 2019 14:10:37 +0800
From:   Peter Xu <>
To:     Jerome Glisse <>
        Hugh Dickins <>,
        Maya Gokhale <>,
        Johannes Weiner <>,
        Martin Cracauer <>,
        Denis Plotnikov <>,
        Shaohua Li <>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <>,
        Pavel Emelyanov <>,
        Mike Kravetz <>,
        Marty McFadden <>,
        Mike Rapoport <>,
        Mel Gorman <>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <>,
        "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 02/24] mm: userfault: return VM_FAULT_RETRY on signals

On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 10:40:18AM -0500, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2019 at 03:57:00PM +0800, Peter Xu wrote:
> > There was a special path in handle_userfault() in the past that we'll
> > return a VM_FAULT_NOPAGE when we detected non-fatal signals when waiting
> > for userfault handling.  We did that by reacquiring the mmap_sem before
> > returning.  However that brings a risk in that the vmas might have
> > changed when we retake the mmap_sem and even we could be holding an
> > invalid vma structure.  The problem was reported by syzbot.
> This is confusing this should be a patch on its own ie changes to
> fs/userfaultfd.c where you remove that path.

Sure I will.

> > 
> > This patch removes the special path and we'll return a VM_FAULT_RETRY
> > with the common path even if we have got such signals.  Then for all the
> > architectures that is passing in VM_FAULT_ALLOW_RETRY into
> > handle_mm_fault(), we check not only for SIGKILL but for all the rest of
> > userspace pending signals right after we returned from
> > handle_mm_fault().
> > 
> > The idea comes from the upstream discussion between Linus and Andrea:
> > 
> >
> > 
> > (This patch contains a potential fix for a double-free of mmap_sem on
> >  ARC architecture; please see for
> >  more information)
> This patch should only be about changing the return to userspace rule.
> Before this patch the arch fault handler returned to userspace only
> for fatal signal, after this patch it returns to userspace for any
> signal.

Ok.  I'll make the first patch to do the signal changes, then the
second patch to remove the userfault path explicitly.

> It would be a lot better to have a fix for arc as a separate patch so
> that we can focus on reviewing only one thing.

I just noticed that it was fixed just a few days ago in commit
4d447455e73b.  Then I'll just simply rebase to Linus master and use
the upstream fix, then I can drop this paragraph.

Thanks for the review!

Peter Xu

Powered by blists - more mailing lists