[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191108063715.GA513315@kroah.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 07:37:15 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Nicolas Geoffray <ngeoffray@...gle.com>,
kernel-team@...roid.com, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] memfd: Fix COW issue on MAP_PRIVATE and
F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE mappings
On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 09:06:14PM -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2019 at 05:00:23PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Nov 2019 14:53:54 -0500 "Joel Fernandes (Google)" <joel@...lfernandes.org> wrote:
> >
> > > F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE has unexpected behavior when used with MAP_PRIVATE:
> > > A private mapping created after the memfd file that gets sealed with
> > > F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE loses the copy-on-write at fork behavior, meaning
> > > children and parent share the same memory, even though the mapping is
> > > private.
> >
> > That sounds fairly serious. Should this be backported into -stable kernels?
>
> Yes, it should be. The F_SEAL_FUTURE_WRITE feature was introduced in v5.1 so
> v5.3.x stable kernels would need a backport. I can submit a backport tomorrow
> unless we are Ok with stable automatically picking it up (I believe the
> stable folks "auto select" fixes which should detect this is a fix since I
> have said it is a fix in the subject line).
Never rely on "auto select" to pick up a patch for stable if you already
know it should go to stable. Just mark it as such, or tell stable@...r
after the fact.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists