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: <CAA9_cmcSXYB1jo1=CQ78eXVcyGWm1_TjQKd-Gmg0yAO3tObOFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 15 Oct 2019 18:44:39 -0700
From:   Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:     "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>
Cc:     Thomas Hellström (VMware) 
        <thomas_os@...pmail.org>, Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@...are.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] mm: Fix a huge pud insertion race during faulting

On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 3:06 AM Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@...temov.name> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 08, 2019 at 11:37:11AM +0200, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
> > From: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@...are.com>
> >
> > A huge pud page can theoretically be faulted in racing with pmd_alloc()
> > in __handle_mm_fault(). That will lead to pmd_alloc() returning an
> > invalid pmd pointer. Fix this by adding a pud_trans_unstable() function
> > similar to pmd_trans_unstable() and check whether the pud is really stable
> > before using the pmd pointer.
> >
> > Race:
> > Thread 1:             Thread 2:                 Comment
> > create_huge_pud()                               Fallback - not taken.
> >                     create_huge_pud()         Taken.
> > pmd_alloc()                                     Returns an invalid pointer.
> >
> > Cc: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
> > Fixes: a00cc7d9dd93 ("mm, x86: add support for PUD-sized transparent hugepages")
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@...are.com>
> > ---
> > RFC: We include pud_devmap() as an unstable PUD flag. Is this correct?
> >      Do the same for pmds?
>
> I *think* it is correct and we should do the same for PMD, but I may be
> wrong.
>
> Dan, Matthew, could you comment on this?

The _devmap() check in these paths near _trans_unstable() has always
been about avoiding assumptions that the corresponding page might be
page cache or anonymous which for dax it's neither and does not behave
like a typical page.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ