linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: Fix a huge pud insertion race during faulting

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]

Date:   Fri, 15 Nov 2019 11:58:00 -0800
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:     Thomas Hellström (VMware) 
        <thomas_os@...pmail.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Thomas Hellstrom <thellstrom@...are.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: Fix a huge pud insertion race during faulting

On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 12:58:08 +0100 Thomas Hellström (VMware) <thomas_os@...pmail.org> wrote:

> 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.

What are the user-visible runtime effects of this change?

Is a -stable backport warranted?