linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/gup: introduce __put_user

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: <20190723153640.GB720@lst.de>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jul 2019 17:36:40 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, john.hubbard@...il.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
        Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@...il.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@...e.de>,
        Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Miklos Szeredi <miklos@...redi.hu>,
        Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Sage Weil <sage@...hat.com>,
        Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@...cle.com>,
        Yan Zheng <zyan@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/gup: introduce __put_user_pages()

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:33:32PM -0700, John Hubbard wrote:
> I'm seeing about 18 places where set_page_dirty() is used, in the call site
> conversions so far, and about 20 places where set_page_dirty_lock() is
> used. So without knowing how many of the former (if any) represent bugs,
> you can see why the proposal here supports both DIRTY and DIRTY_LOCK.

Well, it should be fairly easy to audit.  set_page_dirty() is only
safe if we are dealing with a file backed page where we have reference
on the inode it hangs off.  Which should basically be never or almost
never.